Literature DB >> 21992385

Image quality of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis: effects of projection-view distributions.

Yao Lu1, Heang-Ping Chan, Jun Wei, Mitch Goodsitt, Paul L Carson, Lubomir Hadjiiski, Andrea Schmitz, Jeffrey W Eberhard, Bernhard E H Claus.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze the effects of projection-view (PV) distribution on the contrast and spatial blurring of microcalcifications on the tomosynthesized slices (X-Y plane) and along the depth (Z) direction for the same radiation dose in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT).
METHODS: A GE GEN2 prototype DBT system was used for acquisition of DBT scans. The system acquires PV images from 21 angles in 3° increments over a ±30° range. From these acquired PV images, the authors selected six subsets of PV images to simulate DBT of different angular ranges and angular increments. The number of PV images in each subset was fixed at 11 to simulate a constant total dose. These different PV distributions were subjectively divided into three categories: uniform group, nonuniform central group, and nonuniform extreme group with different angular ranges and angular increments. The simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique (SART) was applied to each subset to reconstruct the DBT slices. A selective diffusion regularization method was employed to suppress noise. The image quality of microcalcifications in the reconstructed DBTs with different PV distributions was compared using the DBT scans of an American College of Radiology phantom and three human subjects. The contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and the full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the line profiles of microcalcifications within their in-focus DBT slices (parallel to detector plane) and the FWHMs of the interplane artifact spread function (ASF) in the Z-direction (perpendicular to detector plane) were used as image quality measures.
RESULTS: The results indicate that DBT acquired with a large angular range or, for an equal angular range,with a large fraction of PVs at large angles yielded superior ASF with smaller FWHM in the Z-direction. PV distributions with a narrow angular range or a large fraction of PVs at small angles had stronger interplane artifacts. In the X-Y focal planes, the effect of PV distributions on spatial blurring depended on the directions. In the X-direction (perpendicular to the chestwall), the normalized line profiles of the calcifications reconstructed with the different PV distributions were similar in terms of FWHM; the differences in the FWHMs between the different PV distributions were less than half a pixel. In the Y-direction (x-ray source motion), the normalized line profiles of the calcifications reconstructed with PVs acquired with a narrow angular range or a large fraction of PVs at small angles had smaller FWHMs and thus less blurring of the line profiles. In addition, PV distributions with a narrow angular range or a large fraction of PVs at small angles yielded slightly higher CNR than those with a wide angular range for small, subtle microcalcifications; however, PV distributions had no obvious effect on CNR for relatively large microcalcifications.
CONCLUSIONS: PV distributions affect the image quality of DBT. The relative importance of the impact depends on the characteristics of the signal and the direction (perpendicular or parallel) relative to the direction of x-ray source motion. For a given number of PVs, the angular range and the distribution of the PVs affect the degree of in-plane and interplane blurring in opposite ways. The design of the scan parameters of tomosynthesis systems would require proper consideration of the characteristics of the signals of interest and the potential trade-off of the image quality of different types of signals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21992385      PMCID: PMC3203126          DOI: 10.1118/1.3637492

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


  16 in total

1.  Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise.

Authors:  I Reiser; R M Nishikawa
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  A comparison of reconstruction algorithms for breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Tao Wu; Richard H Moore; Elizabeth A Rafferty; Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Optimization of a tomosynthesis system for the detection of lung nodules.

Authors:  Angel R Pineda; Sungwon Yoon; David S Paik; Rebecca Fahrig
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  A comparative study of limited-angle cone-beam reconstruction methods for breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Yiheng Zhang; Heang-Ping Chan; Berkman Sahiner; Jun Wei; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Jun Ge; Chuan Zhou
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Optimization of slice sensitivity profile for radiographic tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Baojun Li; Gopal B Avinash; Jeffrey W Eberhard; Bernhard E H Claus
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Convergence of the simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique (SART).

Authors:  Ming Jiang; Ge Wang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Image Process       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 10.856

7.  Image artifacts in digital breast tomosynthesis: investigation of the effects of system geometry and reconstruction parameters using a linear system approach.

Authors:  Yue-Houng Hu; Bo Zhao; Wei Zhao
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study.

Authors:  David Gur; Gordon S Abrams; Denise M Chough; Marie A Ganott; Christiane M Hakim; Ronald L Perrin; Grace Y Rathfon; Jules H Sumkin; Margarita L Zuley; Andriy I Bandos
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Optimized image acquisition for breast tomosynthesis in projection and reconstruction space.

Authors:  Amarpreet S Chawla; Joseph Y Lo; Jay A Baker; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging.

Authors:  L T Niklason; B T Christian; L E Niklason; D B Kopans; D E Castleberry; B H Opsahl-Ong; C E Landberg; P J Slanetz; A A Giardino; R Moore; D Albagli; M C DeJule; P F Fitzgerald; D F Fobare; B W Giambattista; R F Kwasnick; J Liu; S J Lubowski; G E Possin; J F Richotte; C Y Wei; R F Wirth
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  11 in total

1.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications on planar projection images.

Authors:  Ravi K Samala; Heang-Ping Chan; Yao Lu; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Jun Wei; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Optimization of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) acquisition parameters for human observers: effect of reconstruction algorithms.

Authors:  Rongping Zeng; Aldo Badano; Kyle J Myers
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 3.  Task-based measures of image quality and their relation to radiation dose and patient risk.

Authors:  Harrison H Barrett; Kyle J Myers; Christoph Hoeschen; Matthew A Kupinski; Mark P Little
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 4.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part I. The image acquisition process.

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

5.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance of clustered microcalcification detection on breast phantom images acquired with an experimental system using variable scan angles, angular increments, and number of projection views.

Authors:  Heang-Ping Chan; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Mark A Helvie; Scott Zelakiewicz; Andrea Schmitz; Mitra Noroozian; Chintana Paramagul; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Alexis V Nees; Colleen H Neal; Paul Carson; Yao Lu; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Jun Wei
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications in multiscale bilateral filtering regularized reconstructed digital breast tomosynthesis volume.

Authors:  Ravi K Samala; Heang-Ping Chan; Yao Lu; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Jun Wei; Berkman Sahiner; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Computer-aided detection system for clustered microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis using joint information from volumetric and planar projection images.

Authors:  Ravi K Samala; Heang-Ping Chan; Yao Lu; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Jun Wei; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-10-14       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Virtual assessment of stereoscopic viewing of digital breast tomosynthesis projection images.

Authors:  Gezheng Wen; Ho-Chang Chang; Jacob Reinhold; Joseph Y Lo; Mia K Markey
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-01-17

9.  Quantitative assessment of microcalcification cluster image quality in digital breast tomosynthesis, 2-dimensional and synthetic mammography.

Authors:  Andreas E Petropoulos; Spyros G Skiadopoulos; Anna N Karahaliou; Gerasimos A T Messaris; Nikolaos S Arikidis; Lena I Costaridou
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2019-12-07       Impact factor: 2.602

10.  Optimization of configuration parameters in a newly developed digital breast tomosynthesis system.

Authors:  Hye-Suk Park; Ye-Seul Kim; Hee-Joung Kim; Young-Wook Choi; Jae-Gu Choi
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 2.724

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.