Literature DB >> 17280765

Evaluating thin compression paddles for mammographically compatible ultrasound.

Rebecca C Booi1, Jochen F Krücker, Mitchell M Goodsitt, Matthew O'Donnell, Ajay Kapur, Gerald L LeCarpentier, Marilyn A Roubidoux, J Brian Fowlkes, Paul L Carson.   

Abstract

We are developing a combined digital mammography/3D ultrasound system to improve detection and/or characterization of breast lesions. Ultrasound scanning through a mammographic paddle could significantly reduce signal level, degrade beam focusing and create reverberations. Thus, appropriate paddle choice is essential for accurate sonographic lesion detection and assessment with this system. In this study, we characterized ultrasound image quality through paddles of varying materials (lexan, polyurethane, TPX, mylar) and thicknesses (0.25 to 2.5 mm). Analytical experiments focused on lexan and TPX, which preliminary results demonstrated were most competitive. Spatial and contrast resolution, side-lobe and range lobe levels, contrast and signal strength were compared with no-paddle images. When the beamforming of the system was corrected to account for imaging through the paddle, the TPX 2.5 mm paddle performed the best. Test objects imaged through this paddle demonstrated < or = 15% reduction in spatial resolution, < or = 7.5 dB signal loss, < or = 3 dB contrast loss and range lobe levels > or = 35 dB below signal maximum over 4 cm. TPX paddles <2.5 mm could also be used with this system, depending on imaging goals. In 10 human subjects with cysts, small CNR losses were observed but were determined to be statistically insignificant. Radiologists concluded that 75% of cysts in through-paddle scans were at least as detectable as in their corresponding direct-contact scans.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17280765      PMCID: PMC1989131          DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.09.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol        ISSN: 0301-5629            Impact factor:   2.998


  19 in total

1.  Combination of digital mammography with semi-automated 3D breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Ajay Kapur; Paul L Carson; Jeffrey Eberhard; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Kai Thomenius; Murtuza Lokhandwalla; Donald Buckley; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Mark A Helvie; Rebecca C Booi; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Ramon Q Erkamp; Heang-Ping Chan; J Brian Fowlkes; Jerry A Thomas; Cynthia E Landberg
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2004-08

Review 2.  How reliable is modern breast imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in the symptomatic population?

Authors:  H A Moss; P D Britton; C D Flower; A H Freeman; D J Lomas; R M Warren
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 2.350

3.  Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions.

Authors:  A T Stavros; D Thickman; C L Rapp; M A Dennis; S H Parker; G A Sisney
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Registration of three-dimensional compound ultrasound scans of the breast for refraction and motion correction.

Authors:  A Moskalik; P L Carson; C R Meyer; J B Fowlkes; J M Rubin; M A Roubidoux
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.998

5.  A modeled study for diagnosis of small anechoic masses with ultrasound.

Authors:  P L Carson; T V Oughton
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Technique for detecting and evaluating breast lesions.

Authors:  K Richter
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 2.153

7.  Indications for and comparative diagnostic value of combined ultrasound and X-ray mammography.

Authors:  D Novak
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  1983-08       Impact factor: 3.528

8.  Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US--diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics.

Authors:  T M Kolb; J Lichy; J H Newhouse
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Ultrasound as a complement to mammography and breast examination to characterize breast masses.

Authors:  Kenneth J W Taylor; Christopher Merritt; Catherine Piccoli; Robert Schmidt; Glenn Rouse; Bruno Fornage; Eva Rubin; Dianne Georgian-Smith; Fred Winsberg; Barry Goldberg; Ellen Mendelson
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.998

10.  Clinical amplitude/velocity reconstructive imaging (CARI)--a new sonographic method for detecting breast lesions.

Authors:  K Richter
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 3.039

View more
  15 in total

1.  Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: State of the Art.

Authors:  Srinivasan Vedantham; Andrew Karellas; Gopal R Vijayaraghavan; Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  The use of diagnostic frequency continuous ultrasound to improve microcirculatory function after ischemia-reperfusion injury.

Authors:  C Makena Hightower; Marcos Intaglietta
Journal:  Microcirculation       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.628

3.  Robot guidance of an ultrasound probe toward a 3D region of interest detected through X-ray mammography.

Authors:  Marie-Aude Vitrani; Anja Marx; R Zvan Iordache; Serge Muller; Guillaume Morel
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  A Standard Mammography Unit - Standard 3D Ultrasound Probe Fusion Prototype: First Results.

Authors:  Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Sebastian M Jud; Peter A Fasching; Arndt Hartmann; Marcus Radicke; Claudia Rauh; Michael Uder; Marius Wunderle; Paul Gass; Hanna Langemann; Matthias W Beckmann; Julius Emons
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 2.915

Review 5.  Digital mammography imaging: breast tomosynthesis and advanced applications.

Authors:  Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.303

6.  Effect of a gel retainment dam on automated ultrasound coverage in a dual-modality breast imaging system.

Authors:  Jie Li; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Frederic Padilla; J Brian Fowlkes; Fong Ming Hooi; Christine R Lashbrook; Kai E Thomenius; Paul L Carson
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 7.  Breast cancer imaging: a perspective for the next decade.

Authors:  Andrew Karellas; Srinivasan Vedantham
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Three-dimensional ultrasound guidance of autonomous robotic breast biopsy: feasibility study.

Authors:  Kaicheng Liang; Albert J Rogers; Edward D Light; Daniel von Allmen; Stephen W Smith
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.998

9.  Testing a dual-modality system that combines full-field digital mammography and automated breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Christopher L Vaughan; Tania S Douglas; Qonita Said-Hartley; Roland V Baasch; James A Boonzaier; Brian C Goemans; John Harverson; Michael W Mingay; Shuaib Omar; Raphael V Smith; Nielen C Venter; Heidi S Wilson
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2015-12-03       Impact factor: 1.605

10.  Spatial registration of temporally separated whole breast 3D ultrasound images.

Authors:  Ganesh Narayanasamy; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Marilyn Roubidoux; J Brian Fowlkes; Anne F Schott; Paul L Carson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.