Literature DB >> 23966821

Evaluation of mean glandular dose and modulation transfer function for different tube potentials and target-filter combinations in computed radiography mammography.

Siti Aishah Abdul Aziz1, Abdul Khaliq Mohd Saparudin, Ahmad Zaky Harun.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Different target-filter combinations in computed radiography have different impacts on the dose and image quality in digital radiography. This study aims to evaluate the mean glandular dose (MGD) and modulation transfer function (MTF) of various target-filter combinations by investigating the signal intensities of X-ray beams.
METHODS: General Electric (GE) Senographe DMR Plus mammography unit was used for MGD and MTF evaluation. The measured MGD was compared with the dose reference level (DRL), whereas the MTF was evaluated using ImageJ 1.46o software. A modified Mammography Accreditation Phantom RMI 156 was exposed using different target-filter combinations of molybdenum-molybdenum (Mo-Mo), molybdenum-rhodium (Mo-Rh) and rhodium-rhodium (Rh-Rh) at two different tube voltages, 26 kV and 32 kV with 50 mAs.
RESULTS: In the MGD evaluations, all target-filters gave an MGD value of < 1.5 mGy. The one-way ANOVA test showed a highly significant interaction between the MGD and the kilovoltage and target-filter material used (26 kV: F (2,12) = 49,234, P = 0.001;32 kV: F (2,12) = 89,972, P = 0.001). A Tukey post-hoc test revealed that the MGD for 26 kV and 32 kV was highly affected by the target-filter combinations. The test of homogeneity of variances indicates that the MGD varies significantly for 26 kV and 32 kV images (0.045 and 0.030 (P < 0.05), respectively). However, the one-way ANOVA for the MTF shows that no significant difference exists between the target-filter combinations used with 26 kV and 32 kV images either in parallel or perpendicular to the chest wall side F (2,189) = 0.26, P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Higher tube voltage and atomic number target-filter yield higher MGD values. However, the MTF is independent of the X-ray energy and the type of target-filter combinations used.

Keywords:  computed radiography; image processing; mean glandular dose (MGD); modulation transfer function (MTF); spatial resolution

Year:  2013        PMID: 23966821      PMCID: PMC3743978     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Malays J Med Sci        ISSN: 1394-195X


  9 in total

1.  Influence of anode/filter material and tube potential on contrast, signal-to-noise ratio and average absorbed dose in mammography: a Monte Carlo study.

Authors:  D R Dance; A K Thilander; M Sandborg; C L Skinner; I A Castellano; G A Carlsson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  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

3.  Evaluation of mean glandular dose in a full-field digital mammography unit in Tabriz, Iran.

Authors:  Hamed Alizadeh Riabi; Parinaz Mehnati; Asghar Mesbahi
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 0.972

4.  A technique optimization protocol and the potential for dose reduction in digital mammography.

Authors:  Nicole T Ranger; Joseph Y Lo; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Are phantoms useful for predicting the potential of dose reduction in full-field digital mammography?

Authors:  Gisella Gennaro; Luc Katz; Henri Souchay; Claudio Alberelli; Cosimo di Maggio
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-04-06       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Investigation of the effect of anode/filter materials on the dose and image quality of a digital mammography system based on an amorphous selenium flat panel detector.

Authors:  P Baldelli; N Phelan; G Egan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Quantifying the effect of anode surface roughness on diagnostic x-ray spectra using Monte Carlo simulation.

Authors:  A Mehranian; M R Ay; N Riyahi Alam; H Zaidi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition--summary document.

Authors:  N Perry; M Broeders; C de Wolf; S Törnberg; R Holland; L von Karsa
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2007-11-17       Impact factor: 32.976

9.  The effects of x-ray beam hardening on detective quantum efficiency and radiation dose.

Authors:  Molly Donovan Wong; Xizeng Wu; Hong Liu
Journal:  J Xray Sci Technol       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.535

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.