| Literature DB >> 19885317 |
Kwon Su Chon1, Jeong Gon Park, Hyun Hwa Son, Sung Hoon Kang, Seong Hoon Park, Hye-Won Kim, Hun Soo Kim, Kwon-Ha Yoon.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy for spatial resolution and radiation dose of a small-field digital mammographic imaging system using parabolic polycapillary optics.Entities:
Keywords: Capillary optics; Digital mammography; Radiation dose; Spatial resolution
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19885317 PMCID: PMC2770826 DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2009.10.6.604
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Radiol ISSN: 1229-6929 Impact factor: 3.500
Fig. 1Schematic layout (A) and experimental set-up (B) of small-field mammographic imaging system using parabolic polycapillary optics.
Fig. 2Modulation transfer function data for small-field mammographic imaging system using parabolic polycapillary optics for three filters. Each data point presents average value of five measurements. Measurement errors are within ± 5%.
Fig. 3Image taken with small-field mammographic imaging system using rhodium filter with 25-µm thickness for local part of line-pairs phantom. This system showed spatial resolution of 12 lp/mm.
Fig. 4Radiation dose for molybdenum (Mo) and rhodium (Rh) filters with 25 µm thickness at fixed tube voltage (A) and current (B).
Radiation Doses for Mammographic Imaging System with and without Parabolic Polycapillary Optics
Fig. 5Spectra for X-ray beam passing through parabolic polycapillary optics combined with X-ray tube and for direct X-ray beam without passing through optics (A) and X-ray reflectivity of glass parabolic polycapillary optics for various bounced X-rays at incidence angle of 1.7 mrad (B).
Fig. 6X-ray spectra after passing through molybdenum (Mo) and rhodium (Rh) filters with 25 µm thickness.
Fig. 7Images of 0.32-mm-Al2O3 specks in mammography phantom for small-field mammographic imaging system (A) and projection-type digital mammography (B).
Fig. 8Mammographic images of breast cancer tissue with microcalcifications that proven by biopsy to be ductal carcinoma in situ. From comparing same objects shown one square and two circles in A and B, we find that small-field mammographic imaging system (A) shows better spatial resolution than projection-type digital mammography (B).