Literature DB >> 19847017

An alternative method for noise analysis using pixel variance as part of quality control procedures on digital mammography systems.

R Bouwman1, K Young, B Lazzari, V Ravaglia, M Broeders, R van Engen.   

Abstract

According to the European Guidelines for quality assured breast cancer screening and diagnosis, noise analysis is one of the measurements that needs to be performed as part of quality control procedures on digital mammography systems. However, the method recommended in the European Guidelines does not discriminate sufficiently between systems with and without additional noise besides quantum noise. This paper attempts to give an alternative and relatively simple method for noise analysis which can divide noise into electronic noise, structured noise and quantum noise. Quantum noise needs to be the dominant noise source in clinical images for optimal performance of a digital mammography system, and therefore the amount of electronic and structured noise should be minimal. For several digital mammography systems, the noise was separated into components based on the measured pixel value, standard deviation (SD) of the image and the detector entrance dose. The results showed that differences between systems exist. Our findings confirm that the proposed method is able to discriminate systems based on their noise performance and is able to detect possible quality problems. Therefore, we suggest to replace the current method for noise analysis as described in the European Guidelines by the alternative method described in this paper.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19847017     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/22/004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  3 in total

1.  Investigation of noise sources for digital radiography systems.

Authors:  Lutfi Ergun; Turan Olgar
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-10-01

2.  A modified undecimated discrete wavelet transform based approach to mammographic image denoising.

Authors:  Eri Matsuyama; Du-Yih Tsai; Yongbum Lee; Masaki Tsurumaki; Noriyuki Takahashi; Haruyuki Watanabe; Hsian-Min Chen
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Radiation Dose of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: A Two-Center Prospective Comparison.

Authors:  Gisella Gennaro; Andrea Cozzi; Simone Schiaffino; Francesco Sardanelli; Francesca Caumo
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 6.639

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.