Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content
Journal of Digital Imaging logoLink to Journal of Digital Imaging
. 1998 Aug;11(3):121–125. doi: 10.1007/BF03168735

Clinical evaluation of irreversible data compression for computed radiography of the hand

Kazuhiko Uchida 1, Hideyuki Watanabe 1, Takatoshi Aoki 1, Katsumi Nakamura 1, Hajime Nakata 1,
PMCID: PMC3453201  PMID: 9718502

Abstract

We evaluated the clinical utility of high data compression for computed radiography (CR) of the hand. Paired original and compressed CR images were obtained using an FCR 9000 system in 35 patients with various abnormalities of the hand. For the paired original and compressed images, we compared the depiction of the bone cortex, bone trabeculae, soft-tissue, and the margin of the abnormalities. The overall impressions for detectability of the abnormalities and for diagnostic capability were also evaluated. Poorer image quality of the compressed images was noted for most of the structures, but there was no significant difference between the original and compressed images as for the overall impressions for detectability of the abnormalities or for diagnostic capability. We conclude that a high data compression may be clinically acceptable with caution in radiography of the hand.

Key Words: computed radiography (CR), data compression, hand, bone

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (2.4 MB).

References

  • 1.Ishigaki T, Sakuma S, Ikeda M, et al. Clinical evaluation of irreversible image compression: Analysis of chest imaging with computed radiography. Radiology. 1990;175:739–743. doi: 10.1148/radiology.175.3.2343125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.MacMahon H, Doi K, Sanada S, et al. Data compression: Effect on diagnostic accuracy in digital chest radiography. Radiology. 1991;178:175–179. doi: 10.1148/radiology.178.1.1984299. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Mori T, Nakata H. Irreversible data compression in chest imaging using computed radiography: An evaluation. J Thorac Imaging. 1994;9:23–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Kido S, Ikezoe J, Kondoh H, et al. Detection of subtle interstitial abnormalities on digital chest radiographs: acceptable data compression ratios. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167:111–115. doi: 10.2214/ajr.167.1.8659352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Murakami S, Oda N, Terada E, et al. Data compression for chest radiography and mammography using computed radiography. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zashi. 1995;51:13–18. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Uchida K. Evaluation of data compression in gastrointestinal examinations using computed radiography. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zashi. 1996;56:482–489. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Uchida K, Nakamura K, Watanabe H, et al. Clinical evaluation of irreversible data compression for computed radiography in excretory urography. J Digit Imag. 1996;9:145–149. doi: 10.1007/BF03168610. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Fujita S, Tanaka M, Hirota S, et al. Clinical application of computed radiography in orthopedic surgery. J Digit Imag. 1995;8:51–60. doi: 10.1007/BF03168068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Jonsson A, Hennesson P, Herrlin K, et al. Computed vs film-screen magnification radiography of fingers in hyperparathyroidism. An ROC analysis. Acta Radiol. 1995;36:290–294. doi: 10.3109/02841859509177637. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Britton CA, Gabriele OF, Chang TS, et al. Subjective quality assessment of computed radiography hand images. J Digit Imag. 1996;9:21–24. doi: 10.1007/BF03168564. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lindhardt FE. Clinical experiences with computed radiography. Eur J Radiol. 1996;22:175–185. doi: 10.1016/0720-048X(96)89640-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Swee RG, Gray JE, Beabout JW, et al. Screen-film versus computed radiography imaging of the hand: a direct comparison. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168:539–542. doi: 10.2214/ajr.168.2.9016243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Murphey MD. Digital skeletal radiography: spatial resolution requirements for detection of subperiosteal resorption. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989;152:541–546. doi: 10.2214/ajr.152.3.541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Wilson AJ, Mann FA, Murphy WA, et al. Photostimulable phosphor digital radiography of the extremities: Diagnostic accuracy compared with conventional radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;157:533–538. doi: 10.2214/ajr.157.3.1872241. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Digital Imaging are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES