Comparison of technical and anatomical noise in digital thorax X-ray images
1 Department for Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Strasse 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
2 GSF–National Research Center for Environment and Health, Institute of Radiation Protection, Ingolstaedter Landstrasse 1, 85764 Neuherberg (near Munich), Germany
3 Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany
* Corresponding author: Christoph.Hoeschen{at}gsf.de
Former studies by Hoeschen and Buhr indicated a higher total noise in a thorax image than expected from technical noise, i.e. quantum and detector noise. This difference results from the overlay of many small anatomical structures along the X-ray beam, which leads to a noise-like appearance without distinguishable structures in the projected image. A method is proposed to quantitatively determine this ‘anatomical noise’ component, which is not to be confused with the anatomical background (e.g. ribs). This specific anatomical noise pattern in a radiograph changes completely when the imaging geometry changes because different small anatomical structures contribute to the projected image. Therefore, two images are taken using slightly different exposure geometry, and a correlation analysis based on wavelet transforms allows to determining the uncorrelated noise components. Since the technical noise also differs from image to image, which makes it difficult to separate the anatomical noise, images of a lung phantom were produced on a low-sensitive industrial X-ray film using high-exposure levels. From these results, the anatomical noise level in real clinical thorax radiographs using realistic exposure levels is predicted using the general dose dependence described in the paper text and compared with the quantum and detector noise level of an indirect flat-panel detector system. For consistency testing, the same lung phantom was imaged with the same digital flat-panel detector and the total image noise including anatomical noise is determined. The results show that the relative portion of anatomical noise may exceed the technical noise level. Anatomical noise is an important contributor to the total image noise and, therefore, impedes the recognition of anatomical structures.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C S MOORE, J R SAUNDERSON, and A W BEAVIS Investigating the exposure class of a computed radiography system for optimisation of physical image quality for chest radiography Br. J. Radiol., September 1, 2009; 82(981): 705 - 710. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C S MOORE, A W BEAVIS, and J R SAUNDERSON Investigation of optimum X-ray beam tube voltage and filtration for chest radiography with a computed radiography system Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2008; 81(970): 771 - 777. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 O. Tischenko, C. Hoeschen, D. R. Dance, R. A. Hunt, A. D. A. Maidment, and P. R. Bakic Evaluation of a novel method of noise reduction using computer-simulated mammograms Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 81 - 84. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Bath, M. Hakansson, S. Borjesson, S. Kheddache, A. Grahn, M. Ruschin, A. Tingberg, S. Mattsson, and L. G. Mansson Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: introduction to the RADIUS chest trial Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 85 - 91. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Bath, M. Hakansson, S. Borjesson, C. Hoeschen, O. Tischenko, S. Kheddache, J. Vikgren, and L. G. Mansson Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: effect of anatomical noise Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 109 - 113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|