Multi‐system evaluation of baseline‐referenced gray scale CNR profile deviation for phantom‐based ultrasound quality assurance
- 1Department of Radiological Science Chungbuk Health & Science University Cheongju‐si Chungcheongbuk‐do Republic of Korea
- 2Department of Radiological Science College of Health Science Eulji University Seongnam‐si Gyeonggi‐do Republic of Korea
Abstract
Background: Phantom‐based ultrasound quality assurance (QA) commonly incorporates qualitative image assessment, whereas robust baseline‐referenced quantitative indicators for routine monitoring across multiple systems remain limited.
Purpose: To investigate whether controlled transducer surface acoustic shielding produces measurable baseline‐referenced changes in selected dead zone (DZ) and gray scale (GS) indicators across multiple ultrasound systems using an ATS‐539 phantom.
Methods: Four ultrasound systems (GE LOGIQ P10, GE LOGIQ P6, Mindray DC‐70 Exp, and Siemens X150) were evaluated. The transducer aperture was partially shielded with insulating tape at 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, and 30% coverage, applied either centrally or at the indicator‐side margin. Five repeated images were acquired for each condition. GS performance was assessed using the contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) of six cylindrical targets. Target‐specific CNR values were converted to within‐device z‐deviations relative to baseline (L0), and the root‐mean‐square z‐deviation across all six targets (RMS‐z) was used as the primary GS profile indicator. DZ performance was evaluated using landmark‐based pin brightness as a secondary near‐field indicator.
Results: Under central shielding, the GS RMS‐z profile deviation score increased with shielding ratio in all four systems (Spearman ρ = 0.642–0.975, all p < 0.001). Central shielding produced consistent RMS‐z increases across all four systems, whereas indicator‐side shielding yielded a more heterogeneous response: RMS‐z remained positively associated with shielding ratio in three systems (ρ = 0.734–0.917, all p < 0.001), but the response was weaker and non‐significant in the GE LOGIQ P10. Central DZ pin brightness decreased with increasing shielding ratio across all systems (ρ = −0.581 to −0.865, all p < 0.001). Baseline CNR profiles and absolute CNR magnitudes differed substantially among systems, and within‐device baseline referencing was therefore preferred over direct cross‐system comparison. Manual landmark placement demonstrated high repeatability for target‐specific CNR and DZ brightness measurements (ICC(A,1) = 0.88–0.97), whereas the aggregate RMS‐z score showed moderate‐to‐good repeatability (ICC(A,1) = 0.771).
Conclusions: Baseline‐referenced GS CNR profile deviation demonstrated a consistent response to controlled acoustic shielding across multiple ultrasound systems. DZ brightness provided complementary near‐field information but remained a secondary indicator. These findings support device‐specific longitudinal monitoring of phantom‐based QA metrics rather than interpretation based on universal cutoff values.
Related
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Multiparametric Ultrasound Versus Cross-Sectional Imaging for Differentiating Benign and Malignant Cervical Lymph Nodes: A Histopathology-Referenced Retrospective Study
- Baseline-referenced plasma metabolomic trajectories during early post-exercise recovery: A secondary analysis of public human exercise metabolomics data
- Expert-referenced evaluation of large language models for primary suspect drug identification in the FAERS database
- Real-World External Evaluation of an OCT Image Analysis System (AI-CO) in Relation to Humphrey Visual Field Mean Deviation
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluation of Azygos Vein Deviation and Risk of Pedicle Screw Penetration in Thoracic Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis
BibTeX
@article{kim2026multisystem,
title = {{Multi‐system evaluation of baseline‐referenced gray scale CNR profile deviation for phantom‐based ultrasound quality assurance}},
author = {Ji‐Hye Kim and Yeong‐Cheol Heo},
journal = {Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1002/acm2.70880},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70880},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Multi‐system evaluation of baseline‐referenced gray scale CNR profile deviation for phantom‐based ultrasound quality assurance
AU - Ji‐Hye Kim
AU - Yeong‐Cheol Heo
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/27
JO - Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
DO - 10.1002/acm2.70880
UR - https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70880
AB - Background: Phantom‐based ultrasound quality assurance (QA) commonly incorporates qualitative image assessment, whereas robust baseline‐referenced quantitative indicators for routine monitoring across multiple systems remain limited. Purpose: To investigate whether controlled transducer surface acoustic shielding produces measurable baseline‐referenced changes in selected dead zone (DZ) and gray scale (GS) indicators across multiple ultrasound systems using an ATS‐539 phantom. Methods: Four ultrasound systems (GE LOGIQ P10, GE LOGIQ P6, Mindray DC‐70 Exp, and Siemens X150) were evaluated. The transducer aperture was partially shielded with insulating tape at 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, and 30% coverage, applied either centrally or at the indicator‐side margin. Five repeated images were acquired for each condition. GS performance was assessed using the contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) of six cylindrical targets. Target‐specific CNR values were converted to within‐device z‐deviations relative to baseline (L0), and the root‐mean‐square z‐deviation across all six targets (RMS‐z) was used as the primary GS profile indicator. DZ performance was evaluated using landmark‐based pin brightness as a secondary near‐field indicator. Results: Under central shielding, the GS RMS‐z profile deviation score increased with shielding ratio in all four systems (Spearman ρ = 0.642–0.975, all p < 0.001). Central shielding produced consistent RMS‐z increases across all four systems, whereas indicator‐side shielding yielded a more heterogeneous response: RMS‐z remained positively associated with shielding ratio in three systems (ρ = 0.734–0.917, all p < 0.001), but the response was weaker and non‐significant in the GE LOGIQ P10. Central DZ pin brightness decreased with increasing shielding ratio across all systems (ρ = −0.581 to −0.865, all p < 0.001). Baseline CNR profiles and absolute CNR magnitudes differed substantially among systems, and within‐device baseline referencing was therefore preferred over direct cross‐system comparison. Manual landmark placement demonstrated high repeatability for target‐specific CNR and DZ brightness measurements (ICC(A,1) = 0.88–0.97), whereas the aggregate RMS‐z score showed moderate‐to‐good repeatability (ICC(A,1) = 0.771). Conclusions: Baseline‐referenced GS CNR profile deviation demonstrated a consistent response to controlled acoustic shielding across multiple ultrasound systems. DZ brightness provided complementary near‐field information but remained a secondary indicator. These findings support device‐specific longitudinal monitoring of phantom‐based QA metrics rather than interpretation based on universal cutoff values.
SN - 1526-9914
ER -