Literature DB >> 21701051

Image quality assessment in digital mammography: part I. Technical characterization of the systems.

N W Marshall1, P Monnin, H Bosmans, F O Bochud, F R Verdun.   

Abstract

In many European countries, image quality for digital x-ray systems used in screening mammography is currently specified using a threshold-detail detectability method. This is a two-part study that proposes an alternative method based on calculated detectability for a model observer: the first part of the work presents a characterization of the systems. Eleven digital mammography systems were included in the study; four computed radiography (CR) systems, and a group of seven digital radiography (DR) detectors, composed of three amorphous selenium-based detectors, three caesium iodide scintillator systems and a silicon wafer-based photon counting system. The technical parameters assessed included the system response curve, detector uniformity error, pre-sampling modulation transfer function (MTF), normalized noise power spectrum (NNPS) and detective quantum efficiency (DQE). Approximate quantum noise limited exposure range was examined using a separation of noise sources based upon standard deviation. Noise separation showed that electronic noise was the dominant noise at low detector air kerma for three systems; the remaining systems showed quantum noise limited behaviour between 12.5 and 380 µGy. Greater variation in detector MTF was found for the DR group compared to the CR systems; MTF at 5 mm(-1) varied from 0.08 to 0.23 for the CR detectors against a range of 0.16-0.64 for the DR units. The needle CR detector had a higher MTF, lower NNPS and higher DQE at 5 mm(-1) than the powder CR phosphors. DQE at 5 mm(-1) ranged from 0.02 to 0.20 for the CR systems, while DQE at 5 mm(-1) for the DR group ranged from 0.04 to 0.41, indicating higher DQE for the DR detectors and needle CR system than for the powder CR phosphor systems. The technical evaluation section of the study showed that the digital mammography systems were well set up and exhibiting typical performance for the detector technology employed in the respective systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21701051     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/56/14/002

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


  5 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.  Exploring silver as a contrast agent for contrast-enhanced dual-energy X-ray breast imaging.

Authors:  R Karunamuni; A Tsourkas; A D A Maidment
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Technical and clinical breast cancer screening performance indicators for computed radiography versus direct digital radiography.

Authors:  Hilde Bosmans; An De Hauwere; Kim Lemmens; Federica Zanca; Hubert Thierens; Chantal Van Ongeval; Koen Van Herck; Andre Van Steen; Patrick Martens; Luc Bleyen; Gretel Vande Putte; Eliane Kellen; Griet Mortier; Erik Van Limbergen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  On the relevance of modulation transfer function measurements in digital mammography quality control.

Authors:  Kristina T Wigati; Nicholas W Marshall; Kim Lemmens; Joke Binst; Annelies Jacobs; Lesley Cockmartin; Guozhi Zhang; Liesbeth Vancoillie; Dimitar Petrov; Dirk A N Vandenbroucke; Djarwani S Soejoko; Hilde Bosmans
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-04-27

5.  Translation from murine to human lung imaging using x-ray dark field radiography: A simulation study.

Authors:  Janne Vignero; Nicholas W Marshall; Greetje Vande Velde; Kristina Bliznakova; Hilde Bosmans
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.