Selection of equipment for fluorography and chest radiography based on assessment of image quality and patient exposure levels

Modern radiation diagnostics, due to its rapid development and improvement of the methods and technologies used, requires constant monitoring, including in the context of patient irradiation levels. The choice of appropriate X-ray diagnostic equipment is one of the key aspects of ensuring radiation protection. Materials and Methods: The study analyzed X-ray diagnostic machines and digital fluorographs with different imaging technologies (detector types), using the example of lung surveys. The evaluation of the machines was carried out using a specially developed 5-point scale in relation to key parameters of quality and safety. Results and Discussion: The results of the study show that digital X-ray diagnostic machines with a U-arc stand and digital X-ray machines with a flat panel detector demonstrate higher image quality compared to other technologies at relatively low levels of patient irradiation. An additional advantage of such devices for city clinics, compared to "classic" fluorographs, is their versatility and the ability to conduct various X-ray examinations (not only lung examinations), which ensures the interchangeability of devices and the effective redirection of the patient flow during the repair of the device. Conclusion: The results of the study emphasize the importance of choosing the appropriate X-ray equipment to ensure high quality diagnostics and patient protection, taking into account the profile of the organization's medical care.

1. Kim S, Rim B, Choi S, Lee A, Min S, Hong M. Deep Learning in Multi-Class Lung Diseases’ Classification on Chest X-ray Images. Diagnostics. 2022;12(4): 915.

2. Hwa Kieu ST, Bade A, Ahmad Hijazi MH, Kolivand H. A Survey of Deep Learning for Lung Disease Detection on Medical Images: State-of-the-Art, Taxonomy, Issues and Future Directions. Journal of Imaging. 2020;6(12): 131.

3. Hansell DM, Bankier AA, MacMahon H, McLoud TC, Müller NL, Remy J. Fleischner Society: glossary of terms for thoracic imaging. Radiology. 2008;246(3): 697–722.

4. Troyan VN. Radiation diagnostics of the chest organs: National guidelines for radiodiagnosis and therapy. Moscow: GEOTARMedia; 2014. Available from: https://www.geotar.ru/lots/Q0124609.html [Accessed May 15, 2024] (In Russian).

5. Sterlikov SA, Rudnev SG, Obukhova OV. Medical and costeffectiveness of TB detection by fluorography using double reading of chest films. Sotsialnye aspekty zdorovya naseleniya = Social aspects of public health. 2013;34(6): 13.

6. Alekhnovich AV, Druzhinina YuV, Lantukh ZA, Dmitrashchenko AA, Belyakin SA. Associated diseases of the liver and cardiovascular system. Gospitalnaya meditsina = Hospital medicine. 2023;6(3): 50–58.

7. Gogoberidze YT, Klassen VI, Natenson MY, Prosvirkin IA, Vladzimirsky AV, Sharova DE, et al. PhthisisBioMed Artificial Medical Intelligence: Software for Automated Analysis of Digital Chest X-ray/Fluorograms. Modern Technologies in Medicine. 2023;15(4): 5.

8. Health care. Available from: https://rosstat.gov.ru/folder/13721 [Accessed May 15, 2024].

9. Shakhabov IV, Melnikov YU, Smyshlayev АМ. Trend analysis of radiological diagnosis units activity in out-patient medical facilities. Vestnik Ivanovskoy meditsinskoy akademii = Vestnik of the Ivanovo Medical Academy. 2020;25(1): 17-19.

10. Vasilev YuA, Kudryavtsev ND, Mukhortova AN, Soldatov IV, Vladzymyrsky AV. Operation results of radiology departments of the Moscow Health Care Department in 2016–2022. Menedzher zdravookhraneniya = Health care manager. 2024;5: 36–48. DOI: 10.21045/1811-0185-2024-5-36-48.

11. Vlasova MM. Scientific substantiation of the organization of the service of radiation diagnostics and radiation therapyin the conditions of a separate region during the reorganization of health care. Doct. Diss. St. Petersburg; 2001. 37 p.

12. Schaefer-Prokop C, Neitzel U, Venema HW, Uffmann M, Prokop M. Digital chest radiography: An update on modern technology, dose containment and control of image quality. European Radiology. 2008;18(9): 1818–1830.

13. Zelikman MI. Digital systems in medical X-ray diagnostics: monograph. Moscow: Medicine; 2007.

14. Leonov BI, Blinov NN, Kozlovsky EB, Gurzhiev AN. Comparative Characteristics of Domestic Digital Photofluorographes. Business environment and research; 2005. P. 75-77.

15. Bekhterev AV, Labusov VA, Pulmakov AN, Strokov II. Radiologic Diagnostic Methods in Lung Cancer Screening: Literature Review. Zhurnal Poliklinika = Polyclinic Magazine. 2019;18(9): 1818–1830.

16. Postnikov VM. Analysis of approaches to forming the composition of an expert group focused on preparation and decision-making. Science and education. Moscow: Bauman Moscow State Technical University; 2012. No 5.

17. Druzhinina YuV, Lantukh ZA, Tolkachev KV, Soldatov IV, Shatenok MP, Vodovatov AV, et al. Diagnostic reference levels for the city of Moscow during X-ray examinations. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2024;17(3): 103-113. (In Russian) DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2024-17-3-103-113.

18. Gurzhiev АN. What interests a radiologist in digital fluorography? Radiologiya i praktika = Radiology and Practice. 2002:4(1): 53-57.

19. Bekhterev AV, Labusov VA, lokhtin RA, Pyanov DA, Strokov II, Khramov MS. Search for objective quality criteria for digital xray images to optimize their acquisition modes in terms of the quality/doze ratio. Rossiyskiy elektronnyy zhurnal luchevoy diagnostiki = Russian electronic journal of radiology. 2019; 9(1): 160-176. DOI: 10.21569/22227415201991160176.

20. Kamyshanskaya IG, Cheremisin VM, Vodovatov AV, Boriskina AN. Results of the clinical evaluation of the low-dose protocols of the digital linear tomography of the chest. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2020;13(1): 47-59. (In Russian). DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2020-13-1-47-59.

21. Kulberg NS, Reshetnikov RV, Novik VP, Elizarov AB, Gusev MA, Gombolevsky VA, et al. Inter-observer variability between readers of CT images: all for one and one for all. Digital Diagnostics.2021;2(2): 105–118.

22. Sun Z, Lin C, Tyan YS, Ng KH. Optimization of chest radiographic imaging parameters: A comparison of image quality and entrance skin dose for digital chest radiography systems. Clinical Imaging. 2012;36(4): 279–286.

23. Blanc D. European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic images. Radioprotection. 1998;32(1): 73–74.

24. Kroft LJM, Veldkamp WJH, Mertens BJA, Boot MV, Geleijns J. Comparison of eight different digital chest radiography systems: Variation in detection of simulated chest disease. American Journal of Roentgenology . 2005; 185(2): 339–346.

25. Busch HP, Faulkner K. Image quality and dose management in digital radiography: a new paradigm for optimisation. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;117(1–3): 143–147.

26. COCIR Medical Imaging Equipment Age Profile & Density 2021 Available from: https://www.cocir.org/fileadmin/Publications_2021/COCIR_Medical_Imaging_Equipment_Age_Profile_Density_-_2021_Edition.pdf [Accessed February 15, 2024].