An exposure indicator for digital radiography: AAPM Task Group 116 (executive summary).

Digital radiographic imaging systems, such as those using photostimulable storage phosphor, amorphous selenium, amorphous silicon, CCD, and MOSFET technology, can produce adequate image quality over a much broader range of exposure levels than that of screen/film imaging systems. In screen/film imaging, the final image brightness and contrast are indicative of over- and underexposure. In digital imaging, brightness and contrast are often determined entirely by digital postprocessing of the acquired image data. Overexposure and underexposures are not readily recognizable. As a result, patient dose has a tendency to gradually increase over time after a department converts from screen/film-based imaging to digital radiographic imaging. The purpose of this report is to recommend a standard indicator which reflects the radiation exposure that is incident on a detector after every exposure event and that reflects the noise levels present in the image data. The intent is to facilitate the production of consistent, high quality digital radiographic images at acceptable patient doses. This should be based not on image optical density or brightness but on feedback regarding the detector exposure provided and actively monitored by the imaging system. A standard beam calibration condition is recommended that is based on RQA5 but uses filtration materials that are commonly available and simple to use. Recommendations on clinical implementation of the indices to control image quality and patient dose are derived from historical tolerance limits and presented as guidelines.

Chest roentgenographic techniques for demonstrating human lung tumour xenografts in nude rats.

Roentgenographic techniques were investigated for imaging orthotopic lung tumours in anaesthetized nude rats endobronchially implanted with human lung cancer cells. A conventional radiographic unit with a dual-screen, double-emulsion film mammographic receptor produced images preferable to those from a mammographic unit because of superior resolution. Typical exposure factors were 300 mA, 29 kVp, and 17 ms at a focus-film distance of 76 cm with a 2.11 by 2.41 mm effective focal spot and inherent filtration of 1.2 mm aluminium. Sensitivity for tumour detection was 0.93 for 59 animals with pathologically proved tumours and 0.96 for 54 animals with tumours larger than 4 mm or 50 mg. For 24 pathologically tumour-free animals, specificity was 1.00. For 55 animals radiographically judged to have tumours, positive predictive value was 1.00. For all 83 animals, accuracy was 0.95. This technique effectively demonstrates orthotopic human lung tumours in nude rats and should be useful for noninvasive monitoring of tumour presence, location, size, and changes in size.