Literature DB >> 18074617

Anisotropic imaging performance in breast tomosynthesis.

Aldo Badano1, Iacovos S Kyprianou, Robert J Jennings, Josep Sempau.   

Abstract

We describe the anisotropy in imaging performance caused by oblique x-ray incidence in indirect detectors for breast tomosynthesis based on columnar scintillator screens. We use MANTIS, a freely available combined x-ray, electron, and optical Monte Carlo transport package which models the indirect detection processes in columnar screens, interaction by interaction. The code has been previously validated against published optical distributions. In this article, initial validation results are provided concerning the blur for particular designs of phosphor screens for which some details with respect to the columnar geometry are available from scanning electron microscopy. The polyenergetic x-ray spectrum utilized comes from a database of experimental data for three different anode/filter/kVp combinations: Mo/Mo at 28 kVp, Rh/Rh at 28 kVp, and W/Al at 42 kVp. The x-ray spectra were then filtered with breast tissue (3, 4, and 6 cm thickness), compression paddle, and support base, according to the oblique paths determined by the incidence angle. The composition of the breast tissue was 50%/50% adipose/glandular tissue mass ratio. Results are reported on the pulse-height statistics of the light output and on spatial blur, expressed as the response of the detector to a pencil beam with a certain incidence angle. Results suggest that the response is nonsymmetrical and that the resolution properties of a tomosynthesis system vary significantly with the angle of x-ray incidence. In contrast, it is found that the noise due to the variability in the number of light photons detected per primary x-ray interaction changes only a few percent. The anisotropy in the response is not less in screens with absorptive backings while the noise introduced by variations in the depth-dependent light output and optical transport is larger. The results suggest that anisotropic imaging performance across the detector area can be incorporated into reconstruction algorithms for improving the image quality of breast tomosynthesis. This study also demonstrates that the assessment of image quality of breast tomosynthesis systems requires a more complete description of the detector response beyond local, center measurements of resolution and noise that assume some degree of symmetry in the detector performance.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18074617     DOI: 10.1118/1.2779943

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  11 in total

1.  A fast, angle-dependent, analytical model of CsI detector response for optimization of 3D x-ray breast imaging systems.

Authors:  Melanie Freed; Subok Park; Aldo Badano
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  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

Review 3.  Anniversary paper. Development of x-ray computed tomography: the role of medical physics and AAPM from the 1970s to present.

Authors:  Xiaochuan Pan; Jeffrey Siewerdsen; Patrick J La Riviere; Willi A Kalender
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  A statistical, task-based evaluation method for three-dimensional x-ray breast imaging systems using variable-background phantoms.

Authors:  Subok Park; Robert Jennings; Haimo Liu; Aldo Badano; Kyle Myers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Analysis of parenchymal texture with digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison with digital mammography and implications for cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  Despina Kontos; Lynda C Ikejimba; Predrag R Bakic; Andrea B Troxel; Emily F Conant; Andrew D A Maidment
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-07-19       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Experimental validation of Monte Carlo (MANTIS) simulated x-ray response of columnar CsI scintillator screens.

Authors:  Melanie Freed; Stuart Miller; Katherine Tang; Aldo Badano
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 7.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part I. The image acquisition process.

Authors:  Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  A virtual trial framework for quantifying the detectability of masses in breast tomosynthesis projection data.

Authors:  Stefano Young; Predrag R Bakic; Kyle J Myers; Robert J Jennings; Subok Park
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 9.  Breast cancer imaging: a perspective for the next decade.

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

10.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: studies of the effects of acquisition geometry on contrast-to-noise ratio and observer preference of low-contrast objects in breast phantom images.

Authors:  Mitchell M Goodsitt; Heang-Ping Chan; Andrea Schmitz; Scott Zelakiewicz; Santosh Telang; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Kuanwong Watcharotone; Mark A Helvie; Chintana Paramagul; Colleen Neal; Emmanuel Christodoulou; Sandra C Larson; Paul L Carson
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.