Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of monitor display resolution and displayed image size on the spatial resolution of ultra-high-resolution CT images: a phantom study

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To determine the optimal display conditions for ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (UHRCT) images in clinical practice, this study investigated the effects of liquid–crystal display (LCD) resolution and displayed image size on the spatial resolution of phantom images acquired using a UHRCT system. A phantom designed to evaluate the high-contrast resolution was scanned. The scan data were reconstructed into four types of UHRCT image series consisting of the following possible combinations: two types of reconstruction kernels on the filtered back-projection method (for the lung and mediastinum) and two types of matrix sizes (10242 and 20482). These images were displayed under eight types of display conditions: three image sizes displayed on a 2-megapixel (MP) and 3-MP color LCD and two image sizes on an 8-MP color LCD. A total of 32 samples (four image series × eight display conditions) were evaluated by eight observers for high-contrast resolution. The high-contrast resolution of the displayed UHRCT images was significantly affected by the displayed image size, although the largest (full-screen) displayed image size did not necessarily show the maximum high-contrast resolution. When the images were displayed in the full-screen size, LCD resolution affected the high-contrast resolution of only the 20482-matrix-size images reconstructed using the lung kernel. In conclusion, the spatial resolution of UHRCT images may be affected by LCD resolution and displayed image size. To optimize the clinical display conditions for UHRCT images, it is necessary to adopt an LCD with an adequate resolution for each viewing situation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hata A, Yanagawa M, Honda O, Kikuchi N, Miyata T, et al. Effect of matrix size on the image quality of ultra-high-resolution CT of the lung: comparison of 512 × 512, 1024 × 1024, and 2048 × 2048. Acad Radiol. 2018;25:869–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kakinuma R, Moriyama N, Muramatsu Y, Gomi S, Suzuki M, et al. Ultra-high-resolution computed tomography of the lung: image quality of a prototype scanner. PLoS ONE. 2015;10: e0137165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tanabe N, Oguma T, Sato S, Kubo T, Kozawa S, et al. Quantitative measurement of airway dimensions using ultra-high resolution computed tomography. Respir Invest. 2018;56:489–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yanagawa M, Hata A, Honda O, Kikuchi N, Miyata T, et al. Subjective and objective comparisons of image quality between ultra-high-resolution CT and conventional area detector CT in phantoms and cadaveric human lungs. Eur Radiol. 2018;28:5060–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mikayama R, Shirasaka T, Yabuuchi H, Sakai Y, Kojima T, et al. Effect of scan mode and focal spot size in airway dimension measurements for ultra-high-resolution computed tomography of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a COPDGene phantom study. Phys Med. 2020;70:102–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Onishi H, Hori M, Ota T, Nakamoto A, Osuga K, et al. Phantom study of in-stent restenosis at high-spatial-resolution CT. Radiology. 2018;289:255–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yoshioka K, Tanaka R, Takagi H, Ueyama Y, Kikuchi K, et al. Ultra-high-resolution CT angiography of the artery of Adamkiewicz: a feasibility study. Neuroradiology. 2018;60:109–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Meijer FJ, Schuijf JD, Vries Jd, Boogaarts HD, Woude Wv, et al. Ultra-high-resolution subtraction CT angiography in the follow-up of treated intracranial aneurysms. Insights Imaging. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0685-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Tanaka R, Yoshioka K, Takagi H, Schuijf JD, Arakita K. Novel developments in non-invasive imaging of peripheral arterial disease with CT: experience with state-of-the-art, ultra-high-resolution CT and subtraction imaging. Clin Radiol. 2019;74:51–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hino T, Kamitani T, Sagiyama K, Yamasaki Y, Matsuura Y, et al. Detectability of the artery of Adamkiewicz on computed tomography angiography of the aorta by using ultra-high-resolution computed tomography. Jpn J Radiol. 2020;38:658–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yamashita K, Hiwatashi A, Togao O, Kikuchi K, Matsumoto N, et al. Ultrahigh-resolution CT scan of the temporal bone. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;275:2797–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Akazawa Y, Ganaha A, Higa T, Kondo S, Oyakawa Y, et al. Measurement of stapes footplate thickness in otosclerosis by ultra-high-resolution computed tomography. Acta Otolaryngol. 2020;140:899–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ohara A, Machida H, Shiga H, Yamamura W, Yokoyama K. Improved image quality of temporal bone CT with an ultrahigh-resolution CT scanner: clinical pilot studies. Jpn J Radiol. 2020;38:878–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Miyamoto M, Ohara A, Arai T, Koyanagi M, Watanabe I, et al. Three-dimensional imaging of vocalizing larynx by ultra-high-resolution computed tomography. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019;276:3159–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bacher K, Smeets P, Hauwerea AD, Voet T, Duyck P, et al. Image quality performance of liquid crystal display systems: Influence of display resolution, magnification and window settings on contrast-detail detection. Eur J Radiol. 2006;58:471–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kamitani T, Yabuuchi H, Soeda H, Matsuo Y, Okafuji T, et al. Detection of masses and microcalcifications of breast cancer on digital mammograms: comparison among hard-copy film, 3-megapixel liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors and 5-megapixel LCD monitors: an observer performance study. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:1365–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Samei E, Ranger NT, Delong DM. A comparative contrast-detail study of five medical displays. Med Phys. 2008;35:1358–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nishimura A, Ichikawa K, Mochiya Y, Morishita A, Kawashima H, et al. Preliminary investigation of the clinical usefulness of super-high-resolution LCDs with 9 and 15 mega-sub-pixels: observation studies with phantoms. Radiol Phys Technol. 2010;3:70–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Horii A, Kataoka C, Yokoyama D, Fujita N, Yasuda N, et al. Comparison of the detection rates in reduced image by difference of interpolation method. Proc SPIE Med Imaging. 2011;7966:79661E.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Friedenberg A. Sampling-interpolation modulation transfer function as the envelope of the interpolated output. Oct Eng. 2000;39:520–6.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sprawls P. AAPM tutorial: CT image detail and noise. Radiographics. 1992;12:1041–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ziegler A, Köhler T, Proksa R. Noise and resolution in images reconstructed with FBP and OSC algorithms for CT. Med Phys. 2007;34:585–98.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Huda W, Abrahams RB. X-ray-based medical imaging and resolution. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:W393–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Mr. Masahiro Koike and Mr. Shohei Kudomi (Yamaguchi University Hospital, Ube, Japan) for his technical advice, and Dr. Seiichi Murakami, Dr. Yasuyuki Kawaji, Dr. Noriyuki Kuga, Dr. Yutaka Yoshida, Ms. Aiko Ohmaru, and Dr. Yuji Tsutsui (Junshin Gakuen University, Fukuoka, Japan) for participating in our observational experiments.

Funding

The three display monitors used in this study were provided by EIZO Corporation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan

    Yoichiro Ikushima & Kojiro Ikushima

  2. Department of Radiological Science, Faculty of Health Sciences, Junshin Gakuen University, 1-1-1 Chikushigaoka, Minami-ku, Fukuoka, 815-8510, Japan

    Yoichiro Ikushima & Shogo Tokurei

  3. Department of Radiological Technology, Yamaguchi University Hospital, 1-1-1 MinamiKogushi, Ube, 755-8505, Japan

    Shusaku Sato & Kojiro Ikushima

  4. EIZO Corporation, 153-Shimokashiwano, Hakusan, 924-8566, Japan

    Noriyuki Hashimoto

  5. Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan

    Junji Morishita & Hidetake Yabuuchi

Authors
  1. Yoichiro Ikushima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shogo Tokurei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shusaku Sato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kojiro Ikushima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Noriyuki Hashimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Junji Morishita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hidetake Yabuuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoichiro Ikushima.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

J. Morishita received a research grant from the EIZO Corporation (Ishikawa, Japan). N. Hashimoto is a member of EIZO Corporation.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any animal studies.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ikushima, Y., Tokurei, S., Sato, S. et al. Influence of monitor display resolution and displayed image size on the spatial resolution of ultra-high-resolution CT images: a phantom study. Radiol Phys Technol 15, 147–155 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-022-00656-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-022-00656-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation