US20020181661A1 - X-ray detector image quality test techniques - Google Patents

X-ray detector image quality test techniques Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US20020181661A1
US20020181661A1 US09/681,785 US68178501A US2002181661A1 US 20020181661 A1 US20020181661 A1 US 20020181661A1 US 68178501 A US68178501 A US 68178501A US 2002181661 A1 US2002181661 A1 US 2002181661A1
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
region
detector
test data
generating
data
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Granted
Application number
US09/681,785
Other versions
US6488409B1 (en
Inventor
Habib Vafi
Farshid Farrokhnia
Donald Langler
Kenneth Kump
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
GE Medical Systems Global Technology Co LLC
Original Assignee
Individual
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Individual filed Critical Individual
Priority to US09/681,785 priority Critical patent/US6488409B1/en
Assigned to GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, LLC reassignment GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, LLC ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: HABIB VAFI, DONALD F. LANGLER, KENNETH S. KUMP, FARSHID FARROKHNIA
Application granted granted Critical
Publication of US6488409B1 publication Critical patent/US6488409B1/en
Publication of US20020181661A1 publication Critical patent/US20020181661A1/en
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical
Expired - Fee Related legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • AHUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61BDIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B6/00Apparatus for radiation diagnosis, e.g. combined with radiation therapy equipment
    • A61B6/58Testing, adjusting or calibrating apparatus or devices for radiation diagnosis
    • A61B6/582Calibration
    • A61B6/583Calibration using calibration phantoms

Definitions

  • This invention relates to x-ray detectors and more specifically relates to techniques for testing such detectors.
  • automating the analysis of the image of the phantom does not result in full automation of the image quality evaluation, because, like the “manual” methods, they still require intervention by a human operator to place the x-ray phantom(s) in the field of view.
  • human operators are not inclined to take the time to place the x-ray phantom in the field of view.
  • detector problems may go undetected for some time. X-ray images generated while the detector problems go undetected can result in degraded image quality.
  • This invention addresses these problems and provides a solution.
  • the preferred embodiment is useful in an x-ray system comprising a digital detector defining a first region suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image and a second region less suitable for generating such data than the first region.
  • the detector can be tested by providing a source of x-rays and a phantom located between the source and at least a portion of the second region so that the detector generates detector test data in at least a portion of the second region in response to the x-rays.
  • At least one parameter is measured in response to at least a portion the test data.
  • a first value of the one parameter is stored at one point of time.
  • a comparison is made of the first value with a second value of the one parameter generated at a second point in time later than the first point of time.
  • a result signal representing the results of the comparison is generated.
  • the detector can be tested without human intervention, thereby insuring more reliable and timely testing than has been possible in the past.
  • FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an exemplary form of x-ray system employing a preferred embodiment of the invention.
  • FIG. 2 is a schematic top plan view of the detector shown in FIG. 1 illustrating different regions of the detector and also schematically illustrating a preferred form of phantom made in accordance with the invention.
  • FIG. 3 is a schematic, fragmentary, side elevational view of the phantom shown in FIG. 2.
  • FIG. 4 is an enlarged fragmentary top plan view of the phantom shown in FIG. 3 together with adjacent portions of the detector shown in FIGS. 1 and 2.
  • FIG. 5 is graph illustrating an exemplary plot of modulation transfer function versus spatial frequency of phantom grids.
  • a preferred form of x-ray imaging system 10 made in accordance with the invention comprises an x-ray tube 20 that generates x-rays from a focal spot 22 and directs the x-rays in relationship to a central axis CA.
  • a digital image detector 400 detects the x-rays in a well-known manner.
  • a collimator 320 includes collimator blades shown schematically in FIG. 1.
  • a calibration processor 302 includes communication interface or module 304 , a keyboard 305 , a central processing unit (CPU) 306 , a memory 308 and a display unit 309 , such as a computer monitor, all coupled by a bus 307 as shown.
  • the processor may include, for example, a microprocessor, digital signal processor, microcontroller or various other devices designed to carry out logical and arithmetic operations. Signals corresponding to an x-ray image are read from detector 400 by readout electronics 312 .
  • the design and operation of most of the components with numbers greater than 300 are described in more detail in application Ser. No. 09/342,686, filed Jun. 29, 1999, in the names of Kenneth S. Kump et al., entitled “Apparatus And Method For x-ray Collimator Sizing And Alignment,” assigned to General Electric Company and incorporated by reference in its entirety into this specification.
  • Communication interface 304 is coupled through a modem 340 and a network 342 , such as the Internet, to a computer system 344 at a remote location 346 . Maintenance personnel at location 346 monitor computer system 344 to determine if detector 400 requires repair or maintenance.
  • a network 342 such as the Internet
  • FIG. 2 is a top plan view of detector 400 that defines an outer periphery 402 and an inner region 404 that is suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image. Between region 404 and periphery 402 is a margin region 406 less suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image than region 404 . Region 406 is typically about 2-3 millimeters (mm) wide. Within region 406 is a generally rectangular saw tooth strip phantom 420 .
  • Phantom 420 comprises a frame 422 substantially transparent to x-rays and identical regions of interest (ROIs) or coupons 424 that absorb x-rays.
  • ROIs are separated by identical distances of about 10 mm and have dimensions of about 10 by 2 mm.
  • phantom 420 may be located in one of at least two different positions.
  • phantom 420 A is located directly under cover 430 of detector 400 .
  • the location of phantom 420 A has the advantage of being accessible for replacement and service.
  • phantom 420 B may be positioned more accurately than phantom 420 A by being located inside a sealed metal box or cabinet 440 .
  • phantom 420 B is located below an aluminum graphite cover 442 and above a scintillator 444 .
  • An amorphous silicon array 446 is located below scintillator 444 and is carried by a glass substrate 448 .
  • a seal 450 is provided between cover 442 and array 446 to protect scintillator 444 .
  • FIG. 5 illustrates an x-ray image of a tungsten coupon sub-phantom and a modulation transfer function (MTF) curve computed based on the upper edge profile of the tungsten coupon.
  • FIG. 5 also shows how the edge profile of a rectangular tungsten coupon can be used to compute MTF.
  • the coupon illustrated in FIG. 5 is about 30 mm by 30 mm.
  • the vertical axis in FIG. 5 indicates modulation strength and the horizontal axis indicates spatial frequency of the tungsten coupons.
  • the profiles of vertical and horizontal edges of the coupon can be used to compute MTF in horizontal and vertical directions, respectively.
  • the coupon is deliberately positioned at a slightly rotated angle with respect to the top surface of detector 400 to avoid the edge points from lining up along a row or column.
  • phantom 420 is used to conduct a self-test of certain image quality (IQ) parameters of solid state digital x-ray detector 400 .
  • Phantom 420 is located in margin region 406 of detector 400 .
  • Image data from pixels in margin 406 of the detector is created when x-rays are transmitted through phantom 420 to detector 400 .
  • a certain number of rows and columns of data in the margin 406 are read out but are not displayed. This is because the process used to make the detector panels does not always result in uniform deposition of the cesium iodide (x-ray scintillator) on the edges (e.g., region 406 ), compared to the rest of the panel (e.g., region 404 ).
  • cesium iodide x-ray scintillator
  • phantom 420 By planting small x-ray phantoms, such as phantom 420 , in these unused margins (e.g., margin 406 ), it is possible to compute certain image quality parameters. For example, a narrow “edge” phantom as shown in FIGS. 3 and 4 can be used to compute the modulation transfer function (MTF), at every exposure as illustrated in FIG. 5. Alternatively, the noise power spectrum or contrast to noise ratio, can be calculated in this margin region.
  • MTF modulation transfer function
  • an edge-based method of computation can be utilized, based on edge profiles along the diagonal side of each saw tooth of the type shown in FIG. 3.
  • measuring IQ parameters of a x-ray detector involves placing a known x-ray phantom in the field of view, acquiring an image and then processing it to compute the IQ parameters.
  • implanted sub-phantoms such as phantom 420 , inside the detector 400 eliminates the need for an external phantom, and more importantly the need for an operator to place the phantom.
  • a “qualifying” algorithm is used. This algorithm is executed by CPU 306 and ensures that the image data being received in margin 406 are of good enough quality. That is, the x-ray field must be uniform (or be correctable) and the detector quality must be adequate. This is important since patients will be imaged simultaneously while the self-test of the detector is being conducted. This is a feature which limits the amount of x-ray radiation received by the patient. Technologists using good practice will collimate to the interesting patient anatomy. We are relying on the scattered radiation and occasionally “raw” (un-attenuated) radiation to expose phantom 420 in margin region 406 .
  • the qualifying algorithm computes simple statistics in the region of phantom 420 or the parts of region 406 . For example, the mean, minimum, maximum, and standard deviation of gray levels (counts) can be determined. These values are compared to predefined limits to determine if the image data is valid for subsequent calculation. Additional details about the qualifying algorithm are as follows: Step 1) There is first a need to define which ROIs are acceptable for computation. An initial “Pre-calibraion” to select ROIs with acceptably low number of bad pixels, minimum conversion factor (CF), and define a response correlation to the known good area in the region of the detector suitable for creating a patient x-ray image is required. This is conducted once per detector calibration which may occur, for example, roughly yearly.
  • CF minimum conversion factor
  • Step 2 Of the ROIs deemed acceptable in step 1, for each exposure, there are additional acceptance criteria such as: minimum contrast between x-ray absorbing and x-ray transparent areas, and minimum signal count. Only the ROIs passing both step 1 and step 2 criteria will be used in the calculation.
  • CPU 306 executes another algorithm to analyze the data and produce summary data, such as MTF data. Additional details about the MTF algorithm are as follows: Calculate MTF by a) Starting with the 12 th row or column in from the edge of the panel, for an ROI, record the signal response vs the location of the edge; b) Increment until all rows or columns crossing the edge of the imbedded phantom have been sampled; c) Fourier transform the data set; d) Extract the frequency coefficients; e) Normalize the data for each frequency and adjust per the correlation defined in step 1; f) Repeat steps a-e for each acceptable ROI; and g) average all the ROI results.
  • This summary data is then placed into log files in memory 308 that can be actively “swept” using remote diagnostic equipment embodying computer system 344 .
  • the process may proactively call-out to a remote host 344 (at on-line-center) to report its data. This may be done on a scheduled timeline, or when particular events occur (e.g.: values fall below certain pre-defined levels indicating failure or imminent failure). However, as a self-test, what is important is detection of any variations in the MTF on the edges, not the absolute MTF.
  • the creation of summary reports includes the appending of new qualifying data to the “log” files.
  • the data includes a parameter, such as MTF.
  • a process may be included which compares the new data or parameter (or results from trending of current plus previous data) to predefined or calculated parameter thresholds that were previously stored.
  • CPU 306 generates a result signal indicating the results of the comparison.
  • a result signal or a message is sent to remote computer system 344 via modem 340 and the Internet to indicate a problem or status. For example, a message indicating a problem may be sent if the MTF summary data describing an MTF curve like the one shown in FIG. 5 from a previous year is more than 10 percent different from current summary data describing a current MTF curve. All of the foregoing data and parameters may be displayed on display 309 .
  • Using implanted sub-phantoms, such as phantom 420 , in the unused margins of the detector (e.g., region 406 ) allows testing and evaluation of certain parameters of the detector during a normal patient image acquisition.
  • This self-test capability can be used to collect IQ data during every “scan”. Analyzing the data over time can be used to identify possible change or degradation of IQ of the detector in a pro-active fashion.
  • This design results in further automation of image quality evaluation of solid state x-ray detectors. It eliminates or minimizes the reliance on human operators to perform the IQ evaluation on a regular basis, making it possible to be truly pro-active in servicing it.

Abstract

An x-ray system (10) include a digital detector (400) that defines two regions: a first region (404) suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image and a second region (406) less suitable for generating such data than the first region. A source (20) transmits x-rays through a phantom (420) located between the source and the second region (406) so that the detector (400) generates test data in the second region. A processor (302) measures at least one parameter in response to the test data and stores a value of the parameter at one point of time. The processor compares the first value with a second value of the one parameter generated at a later second point in time. The processor also generates a result signal representing the results of the comparison.

Description

    BACKGROUND OF INVENTION
  • This invention relates to x-ray detectors and more specifically relates to techniques for testing such detectors. [0001]
  • Almost all image quality evaluation methods rely on placing off-the-shelf or custom-made x-ray phantoms in the field of view. Some methods use image processing and analysis tools to automatically detect regions of interest in the acquired image of the phantom. These methods have a significant advantage over “manual” methods that rely heavily on human operators to perform these measurements. These methods also provide more consistent and objective measurements. [0002]
  • However, automating the analysis of the image of the phantom does not result in full automation of the image quality evaluation, because, like the “manual” methods, they still require intervention by a human operator to place the x-ray phantom(s) in the field of view. Experience has shown that human operators are not inclined to take the time to place the x-ray phantom in the field of view. As a result, detector problems may go undetected for some time. X-ray images generated while the detector problems go undetected can result in degraded image quality. [0003]
  • This invention addresses these problems and provides a solution. [0004]
  • SUMMARY OF INVENTION
  • The preferred embodiment is useful in an x-ray system comprising a digital detector defining a first region suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image and a second region less suitable for generating such data than the first region. In such an environment, the detector can be tested by providing a source of x-rays and a phantom located between the source and at least a portion of the second region so that the detector generates detector test data in at least a portion of the second region in response to the x-rays. At least one parameter is measured in response to at least a portion the test data. A first value of the one parameter is stored at one point of time. A comparison is made of the first value with a second value of the one parameter generated at a second point in time later than the first point of time. A result signal representing the results of the comparison is generated. [0005]
  • By using the foregoing techniques, the detector can be tested without human intervention, thereby insuring more reliable and timely testing than has been possible in the past.[0006]
  • BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS
  • FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an exemplary form of x-ray system employing a preferred embodiment of the invention. [0007]
  • FIG. 2 is a schematic top plan view of the detector shown in FIG. 1 illustrating different regions of the detector and also schematically illustrating a preferred form of phantom made in accordance with the invention. [0008]
  • FIG. 3 is a schematic, fragmentary, side elevational view of the phantom shown in FIG. 2. [0009]
  • FIG. 4 is an enlarged fragmentary top plan view of the phantom shown in FIG. 3 together with adjacent portions of the detector shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. [0010]
  • FIG. 5 is graph illustrating an exemplary plot of modulation transfer function versus spatial frequency of phantom grids.[0011]
  • DETAILED DESCRIPTION
  • Referring to FIG. 1, a preferred form of [0012] x-ray imaging system 10 made in accordance with the invention comprises an x-ray tube 20 that generates x-rays from a focal spot 22 and directs the x-rays in relationship to a central axis CA. A digital image detector 400 detects the x-rays in a well-known manner. A collimator 320 includes collimator blades shown schematically in FIG. 1.
  • A [0013] calibration processor 302 includes communication interface or module 304, a keyboard 305, a central processing unit (CPU) 306, a memory 308 and a display unit 309, such as a computer monitor, all coupled by a bus 307 as shown. The processor may include, for example, a microprocessor, digital signal processor, microcontroller or various other devices designed to carry out logical and arithmetic operations. Signals corresponding to an x-ray image are read from detector 400 by readout electronics 312. The design and operation of most of the components with numbers greater than 300 are described in more detail in application Ser. No. 09/342,686, filed Jun. 29, 1999, in the names of Kenneth S. Kump et al., entitled “Apparatus And Method For x-ray Collimator Sizing And Alignment,” assigned to General Electric Company and incorporated by reference in its entirety into this specification.
  • [0014] Communication interface 304 is coupled through a modem 340 and a network 342, such as the Internet, to a computer system 344 at a remote location 346. Maintenance personnel at location 346 monitor computer system 344 to determine if detector 400 requires repair or maintenance.
  • FIG. 2 is a top plan view of [0015] detector 400 that defines an outer periphery 402 and an inner region 404 that is suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image. Between region 404 and periphery 402 is a margin region 406 less suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image than region 404. Region 406 is typically about 2-3 millimeters (mm) wide. Within region 406 is a generally rectangular saw tooth strip phantom 420.
  • A fragment of [0016] phantom 420 is shown in FIG. 3. Phantom 420 comprises a frame 422 substantially transparent to x-rays and identical regions of interest (ROIs) or coupons 424 that absorb x-rays. The ROIs are separated by identical distances of about 10 mm and have dimensions of about 10 by 2 mm.
  • Referring to FIG. 4, [0017] phantom 420 may be located in one of at least two different positions. For example, phantom 420A is located directly under cover 430 of detector 400. The location of phantom 420A has the advantage of being accessible for replacement and service. However, phantom 420B may be positioned more accurately than phantom 420A by being located inside a sealed metal box or cabinet 440. As shown in FIG. 4, phantom 420B is located below an aluminum graphite cover 442 and above a scintillator 444. An amorphous silicon array 446 is located below scintillator 444 and is carried by a glass substrate 448. A seal 450 is provided between cover 442 and array 446 to protect scintillator 444.
  • FIG. 5 illustrates an x-ray image of a tungsten coupon sub-phantom and a modulation transfer function (MTF) curve computed based on the upper edge profile of the tungsten coupon. FIG. 5 also shows how the edge profile of a rectangular tungsten coupon can be used to compute MTF. The coupon illustrated in FIG. 5 is about 30 mm by 30 mm. The vertical axis in FIG. 5 indicates modulation strength and the horizontal axis indicates spatial frequency of the tungsten coupons. The profiles of vertical and horizontal edges of the coupon can be used to compute MTF in horizontal and vertical directions, respectively. The coupon is deliberately positioned at a slightly rotated angle with respect to the top surface of [0018] detector 400 to avoid the edge points from lining up along a row or column.
  • In general, [0019] phantom 420 is used to conduct a self-test of certain image quality (IQ) parameters of solid state digital x-ray detector 400. Phantom 420 is located in margin region 406 of detector 400. Image data from pixels in margin 406 of the detector is created when x-rays are transmitted through phantom 420 to detector 400. A certain number of rows and columns of data in the margin 406 are read out but are not displayed. This is because the process used to make the detector panels does not always result in uniform deposition of the cesium iodide (x-ray scintillator) on the edges (e.g., region 406), compared to the rest of the panel (e.g., region 404).
  • By planting small x-ray phantoms, such as [0020] phantom 420, in these unused margins (e.g., margin 406), it is possible to compute certain image quality parameters. For example, a narrow “edge” phantom as shown in FIGS. 3 and 4 can be used to compute the modulation transfer function (MTF), at every exposure as illustrated in FIG. 5. Alternatively, the noise power spectrum or contrast to noise ratio, can be calculated in this margin region.
  • Specifically, for MTF, an edge-based method of computation can be utilized, based on edge profiles along the diagonal side of each saw tooth of the type shown in FIG. 3. [0021]
  • Usually, measuring IQ parameters of a x-ray detector involves placing a known x-ray phantom in the field of view, acquiring an image and then processing it to compute the IQ parameters. The use of implanted sub-phantoms, such as [0022] phantom 420, inside the detector 400 eliminates the need for an external phantom, and more importantly the need for an operator to place the phantom.
  • In addition to providing the necessary sub-phantoms, such as [0023] phantom 420, and an image, a “qualifying” algorithm is used. This algorithm is executed by CPU 306 and ensures that the image data being received in margin 406 are of good enough quality. That is, the x-ray field must be uniform (or be correctable) and the detector quality must be adequate. This is important since patients will be imaged simultaneously while the self-test of the detector is being conducted. This is a feature which limits the amount of x-ray radiation received by the patient. Technologists using good practice will collimate to the interesting patient anatomy. We are relying on the scattered radiation and occasionally “raw” (un-attenuated) radiation to expose phantom 420 in margin region 406. The qualifying algorithm computes simple statistics in the region of phantom 420 or the parts of region 406. For example, the mean, minimum, maximum, and standard deviation of gray levels (counts) can be determined. These values are compared to predefined limits to determine if the image data is valid for subsequent calculation. Additional details about the qualifying algorithm are as follows: Step 1) There is first a need to define which ROIs are acceptable for computation. An initial “Pre-calibraion” to select ROIs with acceptably low number of bad pixels, minimum conversion factor (CF), and define a response correlation to the known good area in the region of the detector suitable for creating a patient x-ray image is required. This is conducted once per detector calibration which may occur, for example, roughly yearly.
  • Step 2) Of the ROIs deemed acceptable in [0024] step 1, for each exposure, there are additional acceptance criteria such as: minimum contrast between x-ray absorbing and x-ray transparent areas, and minimum signal count. Only the ROIs passing both step 1 and step 2 criteria will be used in the calculation.
  • After the image data is qualified, [0025] CPU 306 executes another algorithm to analyze the data and produce summary data, such as MTF data. Additional details about the MTF algorithm are as follows: Calculate MTF by a) Starting with the 12th row or column in from the edge of the panel, for an ROI, record the signal response vs the location of the edge; b) Increment until all rows or columns crossing the edge of the imbedded phantom have been sampled; c) Fourier transform the data set; d) Extract the frequency coefficients; e) Normalize the data for each frequency and adjust per the correlation defined in step 1; f) Repeat steps a-e for each acceptable ROI; and g) average all the ROI results.
  • This summary data is then placed into log files in [0026] memory 308 that can be actively “swept” using remote diagnostic equipment embodying computer system 344. Alternatively, the process may proactively call-out to a remote host 344 (at on-line-center) to report its data. This may be done on a scheduled timeline, or when particular events occur (e.g.: values fall below certain pre-defined levels indicating failure or imminent failure). However, as a self-test, what is important is detection of any variations in the MTF on the edges, not the absolute MTF. The creation of summary reports includes the appending of new qualifying data to the “log” files. The data includes a parameter, such as MTF. A process may be included which compares the new data or parameter (or results from trending of current plus previous data) to predefined or calculated parameter thresholds that were previously stored. CPU 306 generates a result signal indicating the results of the comparison. When these thresholds are exceeded, a result signal or a message is sent to remote computer system 344 via modem 340 and the Internet to indicate a problem or status. For example, a message indicating a problem may be sent if the MTF summary data describing an MTF curve like the one shown in FIG. 5 from a previous year is more than 10 percent different from current summary data describing a current MTF curve. All of the foregoing data and parameters may be displayed on display 309.
  • Using implanted sub-phantoms, such as [0027] phantom 420, in the unused margins of the detector (e.g., region 406) allows testing and evaluation of certain parameters of the detector during a normal patient image acquisition. This self-test capability can be used to collect IQ data during every “scan”. Analyzing the data over time can be used to identify possible change or degradation of IQ of the detector in a pro-active fashion. This design results in further automation of image quality evaluation of solid state x-ray detectors. It eliminates or minimizes the reliance on human operators to perform the IQ evaluation on a regular basis, making it possible to be truly pro-active in servicing it.
  • Those skilled in the art will recognize that the preferred embodiments may be altered and modified without departing from the true spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the accompanying claims. [0028]

Claims (18)

1. In an x-ray system comprising a digital detector defining a first region suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image and a second region less suitable for generating such data than said first region, apparatus for testing the detector comprising:
a source of x-rays;
a phantom located between said source and at least a portion of the second region so that said detector generates detector test data in at least a portion of the second region in response to said x-rays; and
a processor arranged to
measure at least one parameter responsive to at least a portion said test data,
store a first value of said one parameter at one point of time,
make a comparison of said first value with a second value of said one parameter generated at a second point in time later than said first point of time; and
generate a result signal representing the results of said comparison.
2. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 1, wherein said first and second parameters comprise modulation transfer functions.
3. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 1, wherein said processor is arranged to generate said result signal when said first and second values fall within a predetermined tolerance.
4. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 1, and further comprising a communication module arranged to transmit said result signal to a remote location.
5. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 1, wherein said detector comprises a solid-state detector.
6. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 1, and further comprising a display arranged to display at least said first value.
7. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 1, wherein said processor is arranged to generate qualified test data in response to said detector test data and to measure said at least one parameter responsive to said qualified test data.
8. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 7, wherein said processor is arranged to generate said qualified test data by generating statistical values in response to said qualified data based on one or more of mean values, minimum values, maximum values and standard deviation values, and comparing the statistical values with one or more limits.
9. Apparatus, as claimed in claim 1, wherein the second region comprises a margin region.
10. In an x-ray system comprising a digital detector defining a first region suitable for generating data useful for creating a patient x-ray image and a second region less suitable for generating such data than said first region, a source of x-rays, a phantom located between said source and at least a portion of the second region so that said detector generates detector test data in at least a portion of the second region in response to said x-rays, and a processor, a method for testing the detector comprising:
measuring at least one parameter responsive to at least a portion of said test data;
storing a first value of said one parameter at one point of time;
comparing said first value with a second value of said one parameter generated at a second point in time later than said first point of time; and
generating a result signal representing the results of said comparison.
11. A method, as claimed in claim 10, wherein said first and second parameters comprise modulation transfer functions.
12. A method, as claimed in claim 10, wherein said generating comprises generating said result signal when said first and second values fall within a predetermined tolerance.
13. A method, as claimed in claim 10, and further comprising transmitting said result signal to a remote location.
14. A method, as claimed in claim 10, wherein said detector comprises a solid-state detector.
15. A method, as claimed in claim 10, and further comprising displaying at least said first value.
16. A method, as claimed in claim 10, and further comprising:
generating qualified test data in response to said detector test data; and
measuring said at least one parameter responsive to said qualified test data.
17. A method, as claimed in claim 16, wherein said generating said qualified test data comprises:
generating statistical values in response to said qualified data based on one or more of mean values, minimum values, maximum values and standard deviation values, and
comparing the statistical values with one or more limits.
18. A method, as claimed in claim 10, wherein the second region comprises a margin region.
US09/681,785 2001-06-05 2001-06-05 X-ray detector image quality test techniques Expired - Fee Related US6488409B1 (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US09/681,785 US6488409B1 (en) 2001-06-05 2001-06-05 X-ray detector image quality test techniques

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US09/681,785 US6488409B1 (en) 2001-06-05 2001-06-05 X-ray detector image quality test techniques

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
US6488409B1 US6488409B1 (en) 2002-12-03
US20020181661A1 true US20020181661A1 (en) 2002-12-05

Family

ID=24736797

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US09/681,785 Expired - Fee Related US6488409B1 (en) 2001-06-05 2001-06-05 X-ray detector image quality test techniques

Country Status (1)

Country Link
US (1) US6488409B1 (en)

Cited By (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US6652143B2 (en) * 2001-04-12 2003-11-25 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Method and apparatus for measuring the position, shape, size and intensity distribution of the effective focal spot of an x-ray tube
US20060056593A1 (en) * 2002-11-19 2006-03-16 Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. X-ray examination apparatus
WO2006109148A3 (en) * 2005-04-13 2007-03-01 Lodox Systems Proprietary Ltd A calibration tool and a method of calibrating an imaging system
US20070152388A1 (en) * 2006-01-03 2007-07-05 General Electric Company Shock absorber for medical imaging device
EP1925254A1 (en) * 2006-11-24 2008-05-28 Ion Beam Applications S.A. Method and device for quality management in a mammography apparatus
CN102670224A (en) * 2011-03-09 2012-09-19 富士胶片株式会社 Maintenance method of radiological image detection apparatus

Families Citing this family (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US6623161B2 (en) * 2001-08-28 2003-09-23 Ge Medical Systems Global Technology Company, Llc Method and apparatus for identifying and correcting line artifacts in a solid state X-ray detector
US6663281B2 (en) * 2001-09-25 2003-12-16 Ge Medical Systems Global Technology Company, Llc X-ray detector monitoring
US6811314B2 (en) * 2002-06-05 2004-11-02 Agfa-Gevaert Edge phantom
JP2008538293A (en) * 2004-11-24 2008-10-23 コーニンクレッカ フィリップス エレクトロニクス エヌ ヴィ Computer tomography method and computer tomography apparatus
DE102004057741A1 (en) * 2004-11-30 2006-06-01 Siemens Ag Test method for testing the quality of a detector module for an X-ray computer tomograph involves measurement of X-radiation with reference and test modules and then comparison and evaluation of their output signals
US7748901B2 (en) * 2007-04-06 2010-07-06 Unisyn Medical Technologies, Inc. Universal x-ray test bed
US20090268953A1 (en) * 2008-04-24 2009-10-29 Apteryx, Inc. Method for the automatic adjustment of image parameter settings in an imaging system
US8308362B2 (en) * 2009-10-27 2012-11-13 Dental Imaging Consultants, LLC Quality assurance phantom for digital dental imaging and related method
US8399847B2 (en) 2010-11-11 2013-03-19 General Electric Company Ruggedized enclosure for a radiographic device
US8708562B1 (en) 2013-03-05 2014-04-29 Nosil DSC Innovations, Inc. Phantom systems and methods for diagnostic x-ray equipment
EP3077851B1 (en) 2013-12-04 2020-06-17 Koninklijke Philips N.V. Imaging detector self-diagnostic circuitry
US9936935B1 (en) 2014-02-14 2018-04-10 Nosil DSC Innovations, Inc. Phantom systems and methods for diagnostic radiographic and fluoroscopic X-ray equipment

Family Cites Families (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE19746623C1 (en) * 1997-10-22 1998-11-19 Siemens Ag Method of determining line correction values for medical digital image converter

Cited By (13)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US6652143B2 (en) * 2001-04-12 2003-11-25 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Method and apparatus for measuring the position, shape, size and intensity distribution of the effective focal spot of an x-ray tube
US20060056593A1 (en) * 2002-11-19 2006-03-16 Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. X-ray examination apparatus
US7260180B2 (en) * 2002-11-19 2007-08-21 Koninklijke Philips Electronics, N.V. X-ray examination apparatus
US20090147925A1 (en) * 2005-04-13 2009-06-11 Lodox Systems (Proprietary) Limited Calibration tool and a method of calibrating an imaging system
WO2006109148A3 (en) * 2005-04-13 2007-03-01 Lodox Systems Proprietary Ltd A calibration tool and a method of calibrating an imaging system
US7798476B2 (en) 2006-01-03 2010-09-21 General Electric Company Shock absorber for medical imaging device
US20070152388A1 (en) * 2006-01-03 2007-07-05 General Electric Company Shock absorber for medical imaging device
US20100316194A1 (en) * 2006-01-03 2010-12-16 Michael John Utschig Shock absorber for medical imaging device
WO2008062072A1 (en) * 2006-11-24 2008-05-29 Ion Beam Applications S.A. Method and device for quality management in mammography apparatus
EP1925254A1 (en) * 2006-11-24 2008-05-28 Ion Beam Applications S.A. Method and device for quality management in a mammography apparatus
US20100054401A1 (en) * 2006-11-24 2010-03-04 Christian Blendl Method And Device For Quality Management In Mammography Apparatus
US8023617B2 (en) 2006-11-24 2011-09-20 Ion Beam Applications S.A. Method and device for quality management in mammography apparatus
CN102670224A (en) * 2011-03-09 2012-09-19 富士胶片株式会社 Maintenance method of radiological image detection apparatus

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
US6488409B1 (en) 2002-12-03

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US6488409B1 (en) X-ray detector image quality test techniques
US11957501B2 (en) Methods and apparatus for extended low contrast detectability for radiographic imaging systems
JP5834129B2 (en) Enhanced low-contrast detection capability for radiographic imaging systems
US7680311B2 (en) System aid for digital radiographic image quality verification
CN106687045B (en) Data processing equipment, X ray CT device and refer to bearing calibration
US6498831B2 (en) Panel detector pixel replacement method and apparatus
Yaffe et al. Quality control for digital mammography: Part II recommendations from the ACRIN DMIST trial
US10786222B2 (en) Methods, systems, and apparatus for automatically assessing quality of imaging systems
JP4150906B2 (en) Method for monitoring changes in quantum detection efficiency of an X-ray detector
JP2010519504A (en) A device to help determine the detection quantum efficiency
Williams et al. Image quality in digital mammography: image acquisition
US11782176B2 (en) Bad detector calibration methods and workflow for a small pixelated photon counting CT system
JP2004195233A (en) Method and apparatus to reduce spectrum-sensitive type artifacts
CN104350738B (en) Existing method for the source that x-ray beam inhomogeneities is assessed during x-ray exposes
Marshall The practical application of signal detection theory to image quality assessment in x-ray image intensifier-TV fluoroscopy
US20240142393A1 (en) Method for correcting the nonlinearity associated with photon counting detectors of imaging devices
JP2012231210A (en) Imaging apparatus and imaging method
Ghorbanzade Use of Noise Power Spectra (NPS) for quality control in digital radiography
Mawdsley et al. Acceptance testing and quality control of digital mammography equipment
JP4159698B2 (en) Radiographic apparatus inspection method and apparatus therefor
Valentin Chapters 2–4
Supanich et al. CR/DR Image Noise–Part 2
Hyun 11 Quality Assurance/Quality Control
LeFree et al. Computerized assessment and tracking of cardiac angiographic image quality
JPS6351842A (en) X-ray ct apparatus

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, LLC,

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:HABIB VAFI;FARSHID FARROKHNIA;DONALD F. LANGLER;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:011635/0044;SIGNING DATES FROM 20010212 TO 20010525

FPAY Fee payment

Year of fee payment: 4

FPAY Fee payment

Year of fee payment: 8

REMI Maintenance fee reminder mailed
LAPS Lapse for failure to pay maintenance fees
STCH Information on status: patent discontinuation

Free format text: PATENT EXPIRED DUE TO NONPAYMENT OF MAINTENANCE FEES UNDER 37 CFR 1.362

FP Lapsed due to failure to pay maintenance fee

Effective date: 20141203