Image intensifiers are now beyond the realm of experimentation and have become an integral part of the routine equipment in diagnostic radiology. Since the day of W. E. Chamberlain's Carman Lecture, “Fluoroscopes and Fluoroscopy” (1), the need for raising image brightness to cone vision level has been generally recognized. The Westinghouse Corporation in 1949 produced the first practical model of the Coltman image-intensifier tube; Chamberlain, in our institution, Temple University, used this in clinical work. Since that time our interest in image intensification has continued and we have had many tubes available for clinical and experimental purposes. In the desire to standardize photographic procedures utilizing the image-intensifier tubes, we intercompared tubes and evaluated their responses. The data and conclusions that follow are based on both the physical and the practical operating aspects of the tubes tested. The image intensifier is a large vacuum tube containing at the x-ray input end a fluorescent screen which converts the roentgen image into a light image. A photoelectric layer then converts the light image into an electron image. An electrostatic field accelerates the electrons and refocuses them to a sharp image at the small output phosphor layer at the other end of the tube. The output phosphor reconverts the electron image to a visible light image. In this process the original image is reduced in size about twenty-five-fold. Because of this concentration of electrons and the energy they have received from the electrical field, the viewing image is 500 to 3,000 times as bright as the image on a Patterson type B fluoroscopic screen. The light image may be directly viewed through an optical system of lenses and/or mirrors, it may be photographed with a still or motion-picture camera, or it may be displayed via television. The properties of the image-intensifier tubes evaluated were mainly their responses to different qualities and quantities of incident x-ray. Image qualities, i.e., contrast and detail perception, were not considered. We are now evaluating a number of the different image-intensifier television systems at present available for their “efficiency” in transmitting radiologic information; the results will be recorded in a subsequent communication. The variables studied are: (a) the incident x-ray intensity in roentgens per minute at the input end of the intensifier, (b) the intensity of light in millilamberts at the output phosphor screen, and (c) the electron emission in microamperes by the input photoelectric screen (sometimes referred to as the “brightness level”). The tubes are operated according to the specifications of the manufacturer. To simulate operating conditions most closely, the majority of the comparisons were done with a 10-cm. Presdwood phantom in the beam adjacent to the image intensifier. The field size was adjusted to include the entire input screen of the intensifier.
Read full abstract