Advanced multiple beam equalization radiography: Receiver operating characteristic comparison with screen-film chest radiography

Stephen J. Swensen, Gregory L. Aughenbaugh, Larry R. Brown, Gordon F. Harms, Philip R. Karsell, Joel E. Gray, Duane M. Ilstrup, David O. Hodge

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

• Objective'. To test the hypothesis that the advanced multiple beam equalization radiography (AMBER) imaging system is superior to conventional chest radiography in the demonstration of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. • Material and Methods: The study involved 115 patients, each of whom underwent chest computed tomography (CT), AMBER, posteroanterior chest radiography, and conventional posteroanterior stereoscopic chest radiography (two films). All radiographs were obtained with the InSight Thoracic Imaging System. Four chest radiologists independently analyzed the 115 AMBER studies, 115 unpaired single conventional radiographs (a single film from a stereoscopic pair), and 115 stereoscopic conventional radiographs (2 films) for the presence of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. For each abnormality detected, the radiologists described their level of confidence based on a scale of 1 to 5. The 115 CT examinations were interpreted by consensus among 3 of the chest radiologists. The CT results were considered the standard. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) techniques were used for statistical analysis. • Results: No statistically significant differences were found with ROC techniques between the AMBER system and single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography for the abnormalities studied. • Conclusion: We noted no clinically significant difference between AMBER and either single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography in this prospective study of 115 patients in which CT (performed within 1 week of both radiographie examinations) was the standard.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)636-641
Number of pages6
JournalMayo Clinic Proceedings
Volume73
Issue number7
StatePublished - 1998

Fingerprint

Radiography
ROC Curve
Thorax
Tomography
Pulmonary Emphysema
Lung Diseases
Prospective Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Swensen, S. J., Aughenbaugh, G. L., Brown, L. R., Harms, G. F., Karsell, P. R., Gray, J. E., ... Hodge, D. O. (1998). Advanced multiple beam equalization radiography: Receiver operating characteristic comparison with screen-film chest radiography. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 73(7), 636-641.

Advanced multiple beam equalization radiography : Receiver operating characteristic comparison with screen-film chest radiography. / Swensen, Stephen J.; Aughenbaugh, Gregory L.; Brown, Larry R.; Harms, Gordon F.; Karsell, Philip R.; Gray, Joel E.; Ilstrup, Duane M.; Hodge, David O.

In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Vol. 73, No. 7, 1998, p. 636-641.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Swensen, SJ, Aughenbaugh, GL, Brown, LR, Harms, GF, Karsell, PR, Gray, JE, Ilstrup, DM & Hodge, DO 1998, 'Advanced multiple beam equalization radiography: Receiver operating characteristic comparison with screen-film chest radiography', Mayo Clinic Proceedings, vol. 73, no. 7, pp. 636-641.
Swensen, Stephen J. ; Aughenbaugh, Gregory L. ; Brown, Larry R. ; Harms, Gordon F. ; Karsell, Philip R. ; Gray, Joel E. ; Ilstrup, Duane M. ; Hodge, David O. / Advanced multiple beam equalization radiography : Receiver operating characteristic comparison with screen-film chest radiography. In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 1998 ; Vol. 73, No. 7. pp. 636-641.
@article{57bfef0628b64d8bb3444830624e29cd,
title = "Advanced multiple beam equalization radiography: Receiver operating characteristic comparison with screen-film chest radiography",
abstract = "• Objective'. To test the hypothesis that the advanced multiple beam equalization radiography (AMBER) imaging system is superior to conventional chest radiography in the demonstration of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. • Material and Methods: The study involved 115 patients, each of whom underwent chest computed tomography (CT), AMBER, posteroanterior chest radiography, and conventional posteroanterior stereoscopic chest radiography (two films). All radiographs were obtained with the InSight Thoracic Imaging System. Four chest radiologists independently analyzed the 115 AMBER studies, 115 unpaired single conventional radiographs (a single film from a stereoscopic pair), and 115 stereoscopic conventional radiographs (2 films) for the presence of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. For each abnormality detected, the radiologists described their level of confidence based on a scale of 1 to 5. The 115 CT examinations were interpreted by consensus among 3 of the chest radiologists. The CT results were considered the standard. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) techniques were used for statistical analysis. • Results: No statistically significant differences were found with ROC techniques between the AMBER system and single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography for the abnormalities studied. • Conclusion: We noted no clinically significant difference between AMBER and either single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography in this prospective study of 115 patients in which CT (performed within 1 week of both radiographie examinations) was the standard.",
author = "Swensen, {Stephen J.} and Aughenbaugh, {Gregory L.} and Brown, {Larry R.} and Harms, {Gordon F.} and Karsell, {Philip R.} and Gray, {Joel E.} and Ilstrup, {Duane M.} and Hodge, {David O.}",
year = "1998",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "73",
pages = "636--641",
journal = "Mayo Clinic Proceedings",
issn = "0025-6196",
publisher = "Elsevier Science",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Advanced multiple beam equalization radiography

T2 - Receiver operating characteristic comparison with screen-film chest radiography

AU - Swensen, Stephen J.

AU - Aughenbaugh, Gregory L.

AU - Brown, Larry R.

AU - Harms, Gordon F.

AU - Karsell, Philip R.

AU - Gray, Joel E.

AU - Ilstrup, Duane M.

AU - Hodge, David O.

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - • Objective'. To test the hypothesis that the advanced multiple beam equalization radiography (AMBER) imaging system is superior to conventional chest radiography in the demonstration of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. • Material and Methods: The study involved 115 patients, each of whom underwent chest computed tomography (CT), AMBER, posteroanterior chest radiography, and conventional posteroanterior stereoscopic chest radiography (two films). All radiographs were obtained with the InSight Thoracic Imaging System. Four chest radiologists independently analyzed the 115 AMBER studies, 115 unpaired single conventional radiographs (a single film from a stereoscopic pair), and 115 stereoscopic conventional radiographs (2 films) for the presence of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. For each abnormality detected, the radiologists described their level of confidence based on a scale of 1 to 5. The 115 CT examinations were interpreted by consensus among 3 of the chest radiologists. The CT results were considered the standard. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) techniques were used for statistical analysis. • Results: No statistically significant differences were found with ROC techniques between the AMBER system and single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography for the abnormalities studied. • Conclusion: We noted no clinically significant difference between AMBER and either single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography in this prospective study of 115 patients in which CT (performed within 1 week of both radiographie examinations) was the standard.

AB - • Objective'. To test the hypothesis that the advanced multiple beam equalization radiography (AMBER) imaging system is superior to conventional chest radiography in the demonstration of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. • Material and Methods: The study involved 115 patients, each of whom underwent chest computed tomography (CT), AMBER, posteroanterior chest radiography, and conventional posteroanterior stereoscopic chest radiography (two films). All radiographs were obtained with the InSight Thoracic Imaging System. Four chest radiologists independently analyzed the 115 AMBER studies, 115 unpaired single conventional radiographs (a single film from a stereoscopic pair), and 115 stereoscopic conventional radiographs (2 films) for the presence of diffuse infiltrative lung disease, emphysema, pulmonary nodules, calcification within nodules, and mediastinal or hilar masses and lymphadenopathy. For each abnormality detected, the radiologists described their level of confidence based on a scale of 1 to 5. The 115 CT examinations were interpreted by consensus among 3 of the chest radiologists. The CT results were considered the standard. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) techniques were used for statistical analysis. • Results: No statistically significant differences were found with ROC techniques between the AMBER system and single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography for the abnormalities studied. • Conclusion: We noted no clinically significant difference between AMBER and either single or stereoscopic conventional screen-film radiography in this prospective study of 115 patients in which CT (performed within 1 week of both radiographie examinations) was the standard.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=18144450741&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=18144450741&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9663191

AN - SCOPUS:18144450741

VL - 73

SP - 636

EP - 641

JO - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

JF - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

SN - 0025-6196

IS - 7

ER -