Literature DB >> 18383665

Physical characteristics of GE Senographe Essential and DS digital mammography detectors.

Caterina Ghetti1, Adriano Borrini, Ornella Ortenzia, Raffaella Rossi, Pedro L Ordóñez.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate physical characteristics of two full field digital mammography (FFDM) systems (GE Senographe Essential and DS). Both are indirect conversion (x ray to light) alpha-Si flat panels coupled with a CsI(Tl) scintillator. The examined systems have the same pixel size (100 microm) but a different field of view: a conventional size 23 x 19.2 cm2 and a large field 24 X 30.7 cm2, specifically designed to image large breasts. In the GE Senographe Essential model relevant improvements in flat panel design were implemented and new deposition tools for metal, alpha-Si, and CsI(Tl) were introduced by GE. These changes in detector design are expected to be beneficial for advanced applications such as breast tomosynthesis. The presampling modulation transfer function (MTF), normalized noise power spectrum (NNPS), and detective quantum efficiency (DQE) were measured for a wide range of exposure (25-240 microGy) with a RQA-M2 technique (28 kVp with a Mo/Mo target/filter combination and 2 mm of additional aluminum filtration). At 1, 2, and at 4 lp/mm MTF is equal to 0.9, 0.76, and 0.46 for the conventional field detector and to 0.85, 0.59, and 0.24 for the large field detector. The latter detector exhibits an improved NNPS due to a lower electronic noise and a better DQE that reaches 60%. In addition a contrast-detail analysis was performed with CDMAM 3.4 phantom and CDCOM software: GE Senographe DS showed statistically significant poorer detection ability in comparison with the GE Senographe Essential. These results could have been expected, at least qualitatively, considering the relative DQE of the two systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18383665     DOI: 10.1118/1.2828185

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


  8 in total

1.  A statistically defined anthropomorphic software breast phantom.

Authors:  Beverly A Lau; Ingrid Reiser; Robert M Nishikawa; Predrag R Bakic
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Radiomics robustness assessment and classification evaluation: A two-stage method demonstrated on multivendor FFDM.

Authors:  Kayla Robinson; Hui Li; Li Lan; David Schacht; Maryellen Giger
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Mammographic density measurements are not affected by mammography system.

Authors:  Christine N Damases; Patrick C Brennan; Mark F McEntee
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2015-03-04

4.  Automated detection of microcalcification clusters for digital breast tomosynthesis using projection data only: a preliminary study.

Authors:  I Reiser; R M Nishikawa; A V Edwards; D B Kopans; R A Schmidt; J Papaioannou; R H Moore
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  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

6.  Contrast detail phantom comparison on a commercially available unit. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus full-field digital mammography (FFDM).

Authors:  Marco Bertolini; Andrea Nitrosi; Giovanni Borasi; Andrea Botti; Davide Tassoni; Roberto Sghedoni; Giulio Zuccoli
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Study of DQE dependence with beam quality on GE essential mammography flat panel.

Authors:  Rafael García-Mollá; Rafael Linares; Rafael Ayala
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-11-25       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Imaging liver lesions using grating-based phase-contrast computed tomography with bi-lateral filter post-processing.

Authors:  Julia Herzen; Marian S Willner; Alexander A Fingerle; Peter B Noël; Thomas Köhler; Enken Drecoll; Ernst J Rummeny; Franz Pfeiffer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.