The introduction of picture archival and communications systems (PACS) and teleradiology has prompted an examination of techniques that optimize the storage capacity and speed of digital storage and distribution networks. The general acceptance of the move to replace conventional screen-film capture with computed radiography (CR) is an indication that clinicians within the radiology community are willing to accept images that have been 'compressed'. The question to be answered, therefore, is what level of compression is acceptable. The purpose of the present study is to provide an assessment of the ability of a group of imaging professionals to determine whether an image has been compressed. To undertake this study a single mobile chest image, selected for the presence of some subtle pathology in the form of a number of septal lines in both costphrenic angles, was compressed to levels of 10:1, 20:1 and 30:1. These images were randomly ordered and shown to the observers for interpretation. Analysis of the responses indicates that in general it was not possible to distinguish the original image from its compressed counterparts. Furthermore, a preference appeared to be shown for images that have undergone low levels of compression. This preference can most likely be attributed to the 'de-noising' effect of the compression algorithm at low levels.

Sensitivity was found to be 26%, specificity to be 81% and overall accuracy 69%--too low to justify the diagnosis of N2 disease on size of 1.5 cm or larger. CT is not a valid means of diagnosing malignant involvement of mediastinal nodes.

No abstract

No abstract