Nik Hauser1, Zhentian Wang, Rahel A Kubik-Huch, Mafalda Trippel, Gad Singer, Michael K Hohl, Ewald Roessl, Thomas Köhler, Udo van Stevendaal, Nataly Wieberneit, Marco Stampanoni. 1. From the *Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Interdisciplinary Breast Center Baden, Kantonsspital Baden, Baden; †Swiss Light Source, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen; ‡Department of Radiology, §Institute of Pathology, Kantonsspital Baden, Baden, Switzerland; ∥Philips Research Laboratories, Innovative Technologies; ¶Philips Medical Systems DMC GmbH, Hamburg, Germany; and #Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University and Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Differential phase contrast and scattering-based x-ray mammography has the potential to provide additional and complementary clinically relevant information compared with absorption-based mammography. The purpose of our study was to provide a first statistical evaluation of the imaging capabilities of the new technique compared with digital absorption mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated non-fixed mastectomy samples of 33 patients with invasive breast cancer, using grating-based differential phase contrast mammography (mammoDPC) with a conventional, low-brilliance x-ray tube. We simultaneously recorded absorption, differential phase contrast, and small-angle scattering signals that were combined into novel high-frequency-enhanced images with a dedicated image fusion algorithm. Six international, expert breast radiologists evaluated clinical digital and experimental mammograms in a 2-part blinded, prospective independent reader study. The results were statistically analyzed in terms of image quality and clinical relevance. RESULTS: The results of the comparison of mammoDPC with clinical digital mammography revealed the general quality of the images to be significantly superior (P < 0.001); sharpness, lesion delineation, as well as the general visibility of calcifications to be significantly more assessable (P < 0.001); and delineation of anatomic components of the specimens (surface structures) to be significantly sharper (P < 0.001). Spiculations were significantly better identified, and the overall clinically relevant information provided by mammoDPC was judged to be superior (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that complementary information provided by phase and scattering enhanced mammograms obtained with the mammoDPC approach deliver images of generally superior quality. This technique has the potential to improve radiological breast diagnostics.
OBJECTIVES: Differential phase contrast and scattering-based x-ray mammography has the potential to provide additional and complementary clinically relevant information compared with absorption-based mammography. The purpose of our study was to provide a first statistical evaluation of the imaging capabilities of the new technique compared with digital absorption mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated non-fixed mastectomy samples of 33 patients with invasive breast cancer, using grating-based differential phase contrast mammography (mammoDPC) with a conventional, low-brilliance x-ray tube. We simultaneously recorded absorption, differential phase contrast, and small-angle scattering signals that were combined into novel high-frequency-enhanced images with a dedicated image fusion algorithm. Six international, expert breast radiologists evaluated clinical digital and experimental mammograms in a 2-part blinded, prospective independent reader study. The results were statistically analyzed in terms of image quality and clinical relevance. RESULTS: The results of the comparison of mammoDPC with clinical digital mammography revealed the general quality of the images to be significantly superior (P < 0.001); sharpness, lesion delineation, as well as the general visibility of calcifications to be significantly more assessable (P < 0.001); and delineation of anatomic components of the specimens (surface structures) to be significantly sharper (P < 0.001). Spiculations were significantly better identified, and the overall clinically relevant information provided by mammoDPC was judged to be superior (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that complementary information provided by phase and scattering enhanced mammograms obtained with the mammoDPC approach deliver images of generally superior quality. This technique has the potential to improve radiological breast diagnostics.
Authors: Lukas B Gromann; Dirk Bequé; Kai Scherer; Konstantin Willer; Lorenz Birnbacher; Marian Willner; Julia Herzen; Susanne Grandl; Karin Hellerhoff; Jonathan I Sperl; Franz Pfeiffer; Cristina Cozzini Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Ran Zhang; Amy M Fowler; Lee G Wilke; Frederick Kelcz; John W Garrett; Guang-Hong Chen; Ke Li Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Kai Scherer; Konstantin Willer; Lukas Gromann; Lorenz Birnbacher; Eva Braig; Susanne Grandl; Anikó Sztrókay-Gaul; Julia Herzen; Doris Mayr; Karin Hellerhoff; Franz Pfeiffer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Astrid Velroyen; Martin Bech; Irene Zanette; Jolanda Schwarz; Alexander Rack; Christiane Tympner; Tanja Herrler; Claudia Staab-Weijnitz; Margarita Braunagel; Maximilian Reiser; Fabian Bamberg; Franz Pfeiffer; Mike Notohamiprodjo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kai Scherer; Eva Braig; Konstantin Willer; Marian Willner; Alexander A Fingerle; Michael Chabior; Julia Herzen; Matthias Eiber; Bernhard Haller; Michael Straub; Heike Schneider; Ernst J Rummeny; Peter B Noël; Franz Pfeiffer Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-04-15 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Susanne Grandl; Kai Scherer; Anikó Sztrókay-Gaul; Lorenz Birnbacher; Konstantin Willer; Michael Chabior; Julia Herzen; Doris Mayr; Sigrid D Auweter; Franz Pfeiffer; Fabian Bamberg; Karin Hellerhoff Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-05-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Astrid Velroyen; Martin Bech; Arne Tapfer; Andre Yaroshenko; Mark Müller; Philipp Paprottka; Michael Ingrisch; Clemens C Cyran; Sigrid D Auweter; Konstantin Nikolaou; Maximilian F Reiser; Franz Pfeiffer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-02 Impact factor: 3.240