Literature DB >> 19378752

The effect of scatter and glare on image quality in contrast-enhanced breast imaging using an a-Si/CsI(TI) full-field flat panel detector.

Ann-Katherine Carton1, Raymond Acciavatti, Johnny Kuo, Andrew D A Maidment.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of an antiscatter grid and its potential benefit on image quality for a full-field digital mammography (FFDM) detector geometry at energies typical for temporal subtraction contrast-enhanced (CE) breast imaging. The signal intensities from primary, scatter, and glare were quantified in images acquired with an a-Si/CsI(T1) FFDM detector using a Rh target and a 0.27 mm Cu filter at tube voltages ranging from 35 to 49 kV. Measurements were obtained at the center of the irradiation region of 20-80 mm thick breast-equivalent phantoms. The phantoms were imaged with and without an antiscatter grid. Based on these data, the performance of the antiscatter grid was determined by calculating the primary and scatter transmission factors (T(P) and T(S)) and Bucky factors (Bf). In addition, glare-to-primary ratios (GPRs) and scatter-to-primary ratios (SPRs) were quantified. The effect of the antiscatter grid on the signal-difference-to-noise ratio (SDNR) was also assessed. It was found that T(P) increases with kV but does not depend on the phantom thickness; T(P) values between 0.81 and 0.84 were measured. T(S) increases with kV and phantom thickness; T(S) values between 0.13 and 0.21 were measured. Bf decreases with kV and increases with phantom thickness; Bf ranges from 1.4 to 2.1. GPR is nearly constant, varying from 0.10 to 0.11. SPR without an antiscatter grid (SPR-) ranges from 0.35 to 1.34. SPR- decreases by approximately 9% from 35 to 49 kV for a given phantom thickness and is 3.5 times larger for an 80 mm thick breast-equivalent phantom than for a 20 mm thick breast-equivalent phantom. SPR with an antiscatter grid (SPR+) ranges from 0.06 to 0.31. SPR+ increases by approximately 23% from 35 to 49 kV for a given phantom thickness; SPR+ is four times larger for an 80 mm breast-equivalent phantom than for a 20 mm breast-equivalent phantom. When imaging a 25 mm PMMA plate at the same mean glandular dose with and without an antiscatter grid, the SDNR is 4% greater with a grid than without. For an 75 mm PMMA plate, the SDNR is 20% greater with a grid. In conclusion, at the higher x-ray energy range used for CE-DM and CE-DBT, an antiscatter grid significantly reduces SPR and improves SDNR. These effects are most pronounced for thick breasts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19378752      PMCID: PMC2736748          DOI: 10.1118/1.3077922

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


  26 in total

1.  Scatter/primary in mammography: comprehensive results.

Authors:  J M Boone; K K Lindfors; V N Cooper; J A Seibert
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Development of contrast digital mammography.

Authors:  Mia Skarpathiotakis; Martin J Yaffe; Aili K Bloomquist; Dan Rico; Serge Muller; Andreas Rick; Fanny Jeunehomme
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Development and Monte Carlo analysis of antiscatter grids for mammography.

Authors:  John M Boone; Olga V Makarova; Vladislav N Zyryanov; Cha-Mei Tang; Derrick C Mancini; Nikolaie Moldovan; Ralu Divan
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2002-12

4.  Absorption and noise in cesium iodide x-ray image intensifiers.

Authors:  J A Rowlands; K W Taylor
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1983 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Coherent scatter in diagnostic radiology.

Authors:  P C Johns; M J Yaffe
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1983 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  A technique of scatter and glare correction for videodensitometric studies in digital subtraction videoangiography.

Authors:  C G Shaw; D L Ergun; P D Myerowitz; M S Van Lysel; C A Mistretta; W C Zarnstorff; A B Crummy
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Grid and slot scan scatter reduction in mammography: comparison by using Monte Carlo techniques.

Authors:  John M Boone; J Anthony Seibert; Cha-Mei Tang; Steve M Lane
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Grid removal and impact on population dose in full-field digital mammography.

Authors:  Gisella Gennaro; Luc Katz; Henri Souchay; Remy Klausz; Claudio Alberelli; Cosimo di Maggio
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience.

Authors:  Roberta A Jong; Martin J Yaffe; Mia Skarpathiotakis; Rene S Shumak; Nathalie M Danjoux; Anoma Gunesekara; Donald B Plewes
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-07-24       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility.

Authors:  John M Lewin; Pamela K Isaacs; Virginia Vance; Fred J Larke
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-07-29       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  9 in total

1.  Effects of exposure equalization on image signal-to-noise ratios in digital mammography: a simulation study with an anthropomorphic breast phantom.

Authors:  Xinming Liu; Chao-Jen Lai; Gary J Whitman; William R Geiser; Youtao Shen; Ying Yi; Chris C Shaw
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  A comparative analysis of OTF, NPS, and DQE in energy integrating and photon counting digital x-ray detectors.

Authors:  Raymond J Acciavatti; Andrew D A Maidment
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Scatter correction method for x-ray CT using primary modulation: phantom studies.

Authors:  Hewei Gao; Rebecca Fahrig; N Robert Bennett; Mingshan Sun; Josh Star-Lack; Lei Zhu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Impact of flat panel-imager veiling glare on scatter-estimation accuracy and image quality of a commercial on-board cone-beam CT imaging system.

Authors:  Dimitrios Lazos; Jeffrey F Williamson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  A digitally reconstructed radiograph algorithm calculated from first principles.

Authors:  David Staub; Martin J Murphy
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Design and evaluation of a grid reciprocation scheme for use in digital breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Tushita Patel; Helen Sporkin; Heather Peppard; Mark B Williams
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2016-03-29

7.  Validation of a method for measuring the volumetric breast density from digital mammograms.

Authors:  O Alonzo-Proulx; N Packard; J M Boone; A Al-Mayah; K K Brock; S Z Shen; M J Yaffe
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Development of an algorithm to convert mammographic images to appear as if acquired with different technique factors.

Authors:  Alistair Mackenzie; Joana Boita; David R Dance; Kenneth C Young
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2022-06-08

9.  Validation of a mammographic image quality modification algorithm using 3D-printed breast phantoms.

Authors:  Joana Boita; Alistair Mackenzie; Ruben E van Engen; Mireille Broeders; Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-05-20
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.