CR与DR性能影像特点及其临床应用的比较研究

Performance of CR and DR imaging characteristics and clinical application of comparative study

目的:评价计算机X线摄影系统(CR)与数字X线摄影系统(DR)成像性能、特点及优缺点,并进行应用层面的比较分析,为临床科学合理应用仪器资源提供参考。方法:对荆州市两家医院影像科拍摄的852张CR和DR影像片进行回顾性分析,重点评价成像性能、影像特点、摄片质量及临床应用价值。结果:CR和DR摄像优质率分别为89.9%和94.8%,DR摄片优质率高于CR,其差异有统计学意义(x2=7.864,P<0.05)。DR和CR废片率分别为1.4%和9.4%,DR摄片废片率明显低于CR,其差异有统计学意义(x2=6.541,P<0.05)。DR的接收摄片千伏值和毫安秒总体略低于CR,其差异无统计学意义(t=0.6784,t=0.7541;P>0.05)。结论:CR与DR互有优势、劣势,CR使用灵活,且费用较低;而DR较CR具有更高空间分辨率、更广动态范围和更低X射线辐射量,且一次摄片废片率低,速度快,工作效率高。应发挥两者优势,为临床应用提供更多选择。

Objective： To evaluate CR（Computer X-ray imaging system） and DR（digital X-ray imaging system） imaging performance, features, advantages and disadvantages, and for application-level comparative analysis instrumentation for clinical application of scientific and rational resource reference. Methods： In the city diethyl hospital radiology shot 852 CR and DRtablets were retrospectively analyzed, focusing on the performance evaluation of two components as affecting the quality characteristics and radiography, focusing compare their clinical applications. Results： CR imaging quality was 89.9%, DR was 94.8%, DR radiography quality is higher than the CR, the difference was statistically significant（x2=7.864, P〈0.05）; DR waste film was 1.4%, CR rate of waste film 9.4%, DR radiography rejection rate was significantly lower than on the CR（x2=6.541, P〈0.05）, the difference was statistically significant. DR at the receiver radiography kV and mA seconds on the overall value slightly lower than CR, but the difference was not statistically significant（t=0.6784, t=0.7541; P〉0.05）. Conclusion： CR and DR mutual advantages and disadvantages, CR flexible, and lower cost, but the DR over CR has a higher spatial resolution, wider dynamic range and lower X-ray radiation, and a low rate of waste film radiography speed, high work efficiency. Suggest playing two advantages for clinical applications to provide more choices.