Literature DB >> 21908902

Dual-energy contrast-enhanced breast tomosynthesis: optimization of beam quality for dose and image quality.

Ehsan Samei1, Robert S Saunders.   

Abstract

Dual-energy contrast-enhanced breast tomosynthesis is a promising technique to obtain three-dimensional functional information from the breast with high resolution and speed. To optimize this new method, this study searched for the beam quality that maximized image quality in terms of mass detection performance. A digital tomosynthesis system was modeled using a fast ray-tracing algorithm, which created simulated projection images by tracking photons through a voxelized anatomical breast phantom containing iodinated lesions. The single-energy images were combined into dual-energy images through a weighted log subtraction process. The weighting factor was optimized to minimize anatomical noise, while the dose distribution was chosen to minimize quantum noise. The dual-energy images were analyzed for the signal difference to noise ratio (SdNR) of iodinated masses. The fast ray-tracing explored 523 776 dual-energy combinations to identify which yields optimum mass SdNR. The ray-tracing results were verified using a Monte Carlo model for a breast tomosynthesis system with a selenium-based flat-panel detector. The projection images from our voxelized breast phantom were obtained at a constant total glandular dose. The projections were combined using weighted log subtraction and reconstructed using commercial reconstruction software. The lesion SdNR was measured in the central reconstructed slice. The SdNR performance varied markedly across the kVp and filtration space. Ray-tracing results indicated that the mass SdNR was maximized with a high-energy tungsten beam at 49 kVp with 92.5 µm of copper filtration and a low-energy tungsten beam at 49 kVp with 95 µm of tin filtration. This result was consistent with Monte Carlo findings. This mammographic technique led to a mass SdNR of 0.92 ± 0.03 in the projections and 3.68 ± 0.19 in the reconstructed slices. These values were markedly higher than those for non-optimized techniques. Our findings indicate that dual-energy breast tomosynthesis can be performed optimally at 49 kVp with alternative copper and tin filters, with reconstruction following weighted subtraction. The optimum technique provides best visibility of iodine against structured breast background in dual-energy contrast-enhanced breast tomosynthesis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21908902      PMCID: PMC4147785          DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/56/19/013

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


  19 in total

1.  Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomic noise on chest radiographs.

Authors:  E Samei; M J Flynn; W R Eyler
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for arbitrary X-ray spectra in mammography: computer-fit values of Monte Carlo derived data.

Authors:  John M Boone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol.

Authors:  D R Dance; C L Skinner; K C Young; J R Beckett; C J Kotre
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Positron flight in human tissues and its influence on PET image spatial resolution.

Authors:  Alejandro Sánchez-Crespo; Pedro Andreo; Stig A Larsson
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-10-10       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Molybdenum, rhodium, and tungsten anode spectral models using interpolating polynomials with application to mammography.

Authors:  J M Boone; T R Fewell; R J Jennings
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients.

Authors:  R Klein; H Aichinger; J Dierker; J T Jansen; S Joite-Barfuss; M Säbel; R Schulz-Wendtland; J Zoetelief
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  A study of mean glandular dose during diagnostic mammography in Malaysia and some of the factors affecting it.

Authors:  N Jamal; K-H Ng; D McLean
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS).

Authors:  M O Leach; C R M Boggis; A K Dixon; D F Easton; R A Eeles; D G R Evans; F J Gilbert; I Griebsch; R J C Hoff; P Kessar; S R Lakhani; S M Moss; A Nerurkar; A R Padhani; L J Pointon; D Thompson; R M L Warren
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 May 21-27       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  An anthropomorphic breast model for breast imaging simulation and optimization.

Authors:  Baiyu Chen; Jamie Shorey; Robert S Saunders; Samuel Richard; John Thompson; Loren W Nolte; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 3.173

10.  Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years.

Authors:  Diana S M Buist; Peggy L Porter; Constance Lehman; Stephen H Taplin; Emily White
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2004-10-06       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  9 in total

1.  Contrast-enhanced dual energy mammography with a novel anode/filter combination and artifact reduction: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Thomas Knogler; Peter Homolka; Mathias Hörnig; Robert Leithner; Georg Langs; Martin Waitzbauer; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Sabine Leitner; Thomas H Helbich
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Investigation of x-ray spectra for iodinated contrast-enhanced dedicated breast CT.

Authors:  Stephen J Glick; Andrey Makeev
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-01-26

3.  Combined Benefit of Quantitative Three-Compartment Breast Image Analysis and Mammography Radiomics in the Classification of Breast Masses in a Clinical Data Set.

Authors:  Karen Drukker; Maryellen L Giger; Bonnie N Joe; Karla Kerlikowske; Heather Greenwood; Jennifer S Drukteinis; Bethany Niell; Bo Fan; Serghei Malkov; Jesus Avila; Leila Kazemi; John Shepherd
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 4.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part II. Image reconstruction, processing and analysis, and advanced applications.

Authors:  Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  A scatter correction method for contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Yihuan Lu; Boyu Peng; Beverly A Lau; Yue-Houng Hu; David A Scaduto; Wei Zhao; Gene Gindi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-08-03       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Development and application of a suite of 4-D virtual breast phantoms for optimization and evaluation of breast imaging systems.

Authors:  Nooshin Kiarashi; Joseph Y Lo; Yuan Lin; Lynda C Ikejimba; Sujata V Ghate; Loren W Nolte; James T Dobbins; William P Segars; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 10.048

7.  Dual-energy CT imaging with limited-angular-range data.

Authors:  Buxin Chen; Zheng Zhang; Dan Xia; Emil Y Sidky; Xiaochuan Pan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 4.174

8.  Dual Energy Method for Breast Imaging: A Simulation Study.

Authors:  V Koukou; N Martini; C Michail; P Sotiropoulou; C Fountzoula; N Kalyvas; I Kandarakis; G Nikiforidis; G Fountos
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2015-07-13       Impact factor: 2.238

9.  Iodine quantification in limited angle tomography.

Authors:  Koen Michielsen; Alejandro Rodríguez-Ruiz; Ingrid Reiser; James G Nagy; Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-08-16       Impact factor: 4.071

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.