Flat-Panel Digital Radiography

  • Euclid Seeram


The technical aspects of flat-panel digital radiography (FPDR) systems are described in detail in this chapter. The essential elements of these detectors include a definition of FPDR, system components, types of FPDR systems, design characteristics, operational principles, image processing, and imaging performance characteristics, as well as image artifacts and basic features of wireless digital detectors. The definition of these systems includes the use of amorphous silicon (a-Si) and amorphous selenium (a-Se) to produce digital images using a set of electrical components specifically designed to produce digital radiographic images in a manner different than computed radiography (CR) technology. Two common FPDR systems include the indirect and direct digital detector technologies. While the former produces images using an X-ray scintillator (X-ray conversion layer), followed by an amorphous silicon (a-Si) photodiode flat-panel layer, with a thin-film transistor (TFT) array for readout of the electrical charges by the photodiode array, the latter is based on the use of a photoconductor such as amorphous selenium (a-Se) to detect X-ray photons from the patient and convert them directly into electrical charges. A TFT array and associated electronics are also used to collect and store the changes for subsequent readout. The EI is also characteristic of FPDR systems and provide a visual cue as to the amount of exposure used for a particular examination and whether the exposure falls within guidelines suggested by the manufacturer. In addition pre-processing and post-processing present the raw data “for processing” and “for presentation,” respectively. Finally, the chapter concludes with a description of imaging performance characteristics (such as spatial resolution, modulation transfer function, dynamic range, detective quantum efficiency, image lag, and artifacts) and wireless digital radiography detectors.


  1. 1.
    Bushong S. Radiologic science for technologists. 11th ed. St Louis: Elsevier-Mosby; 2017.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antonuk LE, Yorkston J, Huang W. A real time flat-panel amorphous silicon digital X-ray imager. Radiographics. 1995;15:993–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhao W, Rowlands JA. X-ray imaging using amorphous selenium: Feasibility of a flat panel self-scanned detector for digital radiology. Med Phys. 1995;22(10):1595–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Korner M, et al. Advances in digital radiography: physical principles and system overview. Radiographics. 2007;27:675–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yorkston J. Flat-panel DR detectors for radiography and fluoroscopy. In: Goldman L, Yester MV, editors. Specifications, performance, and quality assurance of radiographic and fluoroscopic systems in the digital era. College Park, MD: AAPM Monograph 30; 2004. p. 177–229.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yorkston J. Digital radiographic technology. In: Samei E, Flynn M, editors. Advances in digital radiography. RSNA categorical course in diagnostic radiology physics. Oak Brook, IL: RSNA; 2003. p. 23–36.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM Jr, Boone JM. The essential physics of medical imaging. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2012.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Seibert JA. Computed radiography/digital radiography: Adult. In: Frush DP, Huda W, editors. From invisible to visible-the science and practice of X-ray imaging and radiation dose optimization: RSNA categorical course in diagnostic radiology physics. Oak Brook, IL: RSNA; 2006. p. 57–71.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Willis CE. Computed radiography/digital radiography: pediatric. In: Frush DP, Huda W, editors. From invisible to visible-the science and practice of X-ray imaging and radiation dose optimization: RSNA categorical course in diagnostic radiology physics. Oak Brook, IL: RSNA; 2006. p. 78–83.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yorkston J. Senior research scientist, clinical applications research, Carestream Health Inc. New York: Personal Communications; 2017.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spahn M. Flat detectors and their clinical applications. Eur Radiol. 2005;15:1934–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lanca L, Silva A. Digital imaging systems for plain radiography. New York: Springer Science+Business Media; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tokuhiro O, Gidou T, and Kashino T. Development of a Wireless Cassette Digital Radiography Detector; Konica Minolta Medical & Graphic, Inc., Development Center, Development Department, Konica Minolta Technology Report Vol 8, 2011.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Samei E, Murphy S, Christianson O. DQE of wireless digital detectors: comparative performance with differing filtration schemes. Med Phys. 2013;40(8):081910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garrido Blazquez M, Agulla Otero M, Rodriguez Reco FJ, Torres Cabrera R, Hernando Gonzalez I. Wireless digital radiography detectors in the emergency area: an efficacious solution. Radiologia. 2013;55(3):239–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Euclid Seeram
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Medical Radiation Sciences University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Medical Radiation Sciences, Faculty of Health SciencesUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Adjunct Associate Professor, Medical Imaging and Radiation SciencesMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia
  4. 4.Adjunct Professor, Faculty of ScienceCharles Sturt UniversityWagga WaggaAustralia
  5. 5.Adjunct Associate Professor, Medical Radiation Sciences, Faculty of HealthUniversity of CanberraBruceAustralia

Personalised recommendations