| pubmed-article:1563421 | pubmed:abstractText | The usefulness of digital image processing of chest radiographs was evaluated in a clinical study. In 54 patients, chest radiographs in the posteroanterior projection were obtained by both 14 inch digital image intensifier equipment and the conventional screen-film technique. The digital radiographs (512 x 512 image format) viewed on a 625 line monitor were processed in three different ways: (1) standard display; (2) digital edge enhancement for the standard display; and (3) inverse intensity display. The radiographs were interpreted independently by three radiologists. The diagnoses were confirmed by CT, follow-up radiographs and clinical records. Chest abnormalities of the films analyzed included 21 primary lung tumors, 44 pulmonary nodules, 16 cases with mediastinal disease and 17 cases with pneumonia/atelectasis. Interstitial lung disease, pleural plaques, and pulmonary emphysema were found in 30, 18 and 19 cases, respectively. The sensitivity of conventional radiography when averaged overall findings was better than that of the digital techniques (P less than 0.001). The differences in diagnostic accuracy measured by sensitivity and specificity between the three digital display modes were small. Standard image display showed better sensitivity for pulmonary nodules (0.74 vs 0.66; P less than 0.05) but poorer specificity for pulmonary emphysema (0.85 vs. 0.93; P less than 0.05) compared with inverse intensity display. We conclude that when using 512 x 512 image format, the routine use of digital edge enhancement and tone reversal at digital chest radiographs is not warranted. | lld:pubmed |
