Literature DB >> 18649474

Optimization of exposure parameters in full field digital mammography.

Mark B Williams1, Priya Raghunathan, Mitali J More, J Anthony Seibert, Alexander Kwan, Joseph Y Lo, Ehsan Samei, Nicole T Ranger, Laurie L Fajardo, Allen McGruder, Sandra M McGruder, Andrew D A Maidment, Martin J Yaffe, Aili Bloomquist, Gordon E Mawdsley.   

Abstract

Optimization of exposure parameters (target, filter, and kVp) in digital mammography necessitates maximization of the image signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), while simultaneously minimizing patient dose. The goal of this study is to compare, for each of the major commercially available full field digital mammography (FFDM) systems, the impact of the selection of technique factors on image SNR and radiation dose for a range of breast thickness and tissue types. This phantom study is an update of a previous investigation and includes measurements on recent versions of two of the FFDM systems discussed in that article, as well as on three FFDM systems not available at that time. The five commercial FFDM systems tested, the Senographe 2000D from GE Healthcare, the Mammomat Novation DR from Siemens, the Selenia from Hologic, the Fischer Senoscan, and Fuji's 5000MA used with a Lorad M-IV mammography unit, are located at five different university test sites. Performance was assessed using all available x-ray target and filter combinations and nine different phantom types (three compressed thicknesses and three tissue composition types). Each phantom type was also imaged using the automatic exposure control (AEC) of each system to identify the exposure parameters used under automated image acquisition. The figure of merit (FOM) used to compare technique factors is the ratio of the square of the image SNR to the mean glandular dose. The results show that, for a given target/filter combination, in general FOM is a slowly changing function of kVp, with stronger dependence on the choice of target/filter combination. In all cases the FOM was a decreasing function of kVp at the top of the available range of kVp settings, indicating that higher tube voltages would produce no further performance improvement. For a given phantom type, the exposure parameter set resulting in the highest FOM value was system specific, depending on both the set of available target/filter combinations, and on the receptor type. In most cases, the AECs of the FFDM systems successfully identified exposure parameters resulting in FOM values near the maximum ones, however, there were several examples where AEC performance could be improved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18649474      PMCID: PMC2809723          DOI: 10.1118/1.2912177

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


  10 in total

1.  Glandular breast dose for monoenergetic and high-energy X-ray beams: Monte Carlo assessment.

Authors:  J M Boone
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose.

Authors:  Eric A Berns; R Edward Hendrick; Gary R Cutter
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Experimental investigation of the dose and image quality characteristics of a digital mammography imaging system.

Authors:  Walter Huda; Anthony M Sajewicz; Kent M Ogden; David R Dance
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Using a human visual system model to optimize soft-copy mammography display: influence of MTF compensation.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski; Jeffrey Johnson; Hans Roehrig; Michael Engstrom; Jiahua Fan; John Nafziger; Jeffrey Lubin; William J Dallas
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  Differential use of image enhancement techniques by experienced and inexperienced observers.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Krupinski; Hans Roehrig; William Dallas; Jiahua Fan
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  X-ray spectrum optimization of full-field digital mammography: simulation and phantom study.

Authors:  Philipp Bernhardt; Thomas Mertelmeier; Martin Hoheisel
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Parametrization of mammography normalized average glandular dose tables.

Authors:  W T Sobol; X Wu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Dosage evaluation in mammography.

Authors:  L Stanton; T Villafana; J L Day; D A Lightfoot
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Dual-energy mammography: a detector analysis.

Authors:  J M Boone; G S Shaber; M Tecotzky
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1990 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: effects of image processing and lesion type.

Authors:  Elodia B Cole; Etta D Pisano; Emily O Kistner; Keith E Muller; Marylee E Brown; Stephen A Feig; Roberta A Jong; Andrew D A Maidment; Melinda J Staiger; Cherie M Kuzmiak; Rita I Freimanis; Nadine Lesko; Eric L Rosen; Ruth Walsh; Margaret Williford; M Patricia Braeuning
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 11.105

  10 in total
  15 in total

1.  A technique optimization protocol and the potential for dose reduction in digital mammography.

Authors:  Nicole T Ranger; Joseph Y Lo; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Dual-modality breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Mark B Williams; Patricia G Judy; Spencer Gunn; Stanislaw Majewski
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis--a feasibility study.

Authors:  A-K Carton; S C Gavenonis; J A Currivan; E F Conant; M D Schnall; A D A Maidment
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2009-06-08       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Investigation of the effect of anode/filter materials on the dose and image quality of a digital mammography system based on an amorphous selenium flat panel detector.

Authors:  P Baldelli; N Phelan; G Egan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Optimization of exposure parameters for cone beam computed tomography sialography.

Authors:  F M Jadu; M L Hill; M J Yaffe; Ernest W N Lam
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  Determination of Tube Output (kVp) and Exposure Mode for Breast Phantom of Various Thicknesses/Glandularity for Digital Mammography.

Authors:  Kamal Izdihar; Kumari Chelliah Kanaga; Vijayalakshimi Krishnapillai; Tamanang Sulaiman
Journal:  Malays J Med Sci       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb

7.  Estimates of Average Glandular Dose with Auto-modes of X-ray Exposures in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Izdihar Kamal; Kanaga K Chelliah; Nawal Mustafa
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2015-05-28

8.  Monochromatic mammography using scanning multilayer X-ray mirrors.

Authors:  David L Windt
Journal:  Rev Sci Instrum       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 1.523

9.  Using aluminum for scatter control in mammography: preliminary work using measurements of CNR and FOM.

Authors:  Khaled Al Khalifah; Rob Davidson; Abel Zhou
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2019-11-20

10.  Effects on image quality of a 2D antiscatter grid in x-ray digital breast tomosynthesis: Initial experience using the dual modality (x-ray and molecular) breast tomosynthesis scanner.

Authors:  Tushita Patel; Heather Peppard; Mark B Williams
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.