Skip Navigation


Radiation Protection Dosimetry Advance Access originally published online on February 3, 2006
Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2005 117(1-3):304-308; doi:10.1093/rpd/nci745
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
117/1-3/304    most recent
nci745v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kotre, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Guibelalde, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kotre, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Guibelalde, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Quantification of motion unsharpness in digital fluoroscopy

C. J. Kotre1,*, N. W. Marshall2 and E. Guibelalde3

1 Regional Medical Physics Department, Newcastle General Hospital, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE4 6BE, UK
2 Clinical Physics Group, St Bartholemew's Hospital, London EC1A 7BE, UK
3 Department of Radiology (Medical Physics), School of Medicine, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain

* Corresponding author: John.Kotre{at}nuth.northy.nhs.uk

The objectives of this work were first to develop a convenient method to quantify persistence in digital fluoroscopy systems, then to quantify the effect of variable temporal averaging on the detection of moving low-contrast test details within digital fluoroscopic and pulsed fluoroscopic images. The results were analysed to clarify the relationship between the optimum persistence required to see the lowest contrast for circular test details for a range of diameters and their speed of movement. The optimum persistence values obtained are compared with the limited data available on speeds of movement of patient organs during fluoroscopy. It is tentatively concluded that for imaging the abdomen, the optimum imaging system persistence time constant is ~0.15 s. For the much greater speeds associated with cardiac motion, no additional frame averaging is necessary, i.e. just the persistence provided by the observer's visual system appears to be optimal for small objects.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.