PURPOSE: The purpose is to develop a new image toggle tool with automatic density normalization (ADN) and automatic alignment (AA) for comparing serial digital mammograms (DMGs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed an ADN and AA process to compare the images of serial DMGs. In image density normalization, a linear interpolation was applied by taking two points of high- and low-brightness areas. The alignment was calculated by determining the point of the greatest correlation while shifting the alignment between the current and prior images. These processes were performed on a PC with a 3.20-GHz Xeon processor and 8 GB of main memory. We selected 12 suspected breast cancer patients who had undergone screening DMGs in the past. Automatic processing was retrospectively performed on these images. Two radiologists subjectively evaluated them. RESULTS: The process of the developed algorithm took approximately 1 s per image. In our preliminary experience, two images could not be aligned approximately. When they were aligned, image toggling allowed detection of differences between examinations easily. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a new tool to facilitate comparative reading of DMGs on a mammography viewing system. Using this tool for toggling comparisons might improve the interpretation efficiency of serial DMGs.
PURPOSE: The purpose is to develop a new image toggle tool with automatic density normalization (ADN) and automatic alignment (AA) for comparing serial digital mammograms (DMGs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed an ADN and AA process to compare the images of serial DMGs. In image density normalization, a linear interpolation was applied by taking two points of high- and low-brightness areas. The alignment was calculated by determining the point of the greatest correlation while shifting the alignment between the current and prior images. These processes were performed on a PC with a 3.20-GHz Xeon processor and 8 GB of main memory. We selected 12 suspected breast cancerpatients who had undergone screening DMGs in the past. Automatic processing was retrospectively performed on these images. Two radiologists subjectively evaluated them. RESULTS: The process of the developed algorithm took approximately 1 s per image. In our preliminary experience, two images could not be aligned approximately. When they were aligned, image toggling allowed detection of differences between examinations easily. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a new tool to facilitate comparative reading of DMGs on a mammography viewing system. Using this tool for toggling comparisons might improve the interpretation efficiency of serial DMGs.
Authors: Jay A Baker; Eric L Rosen; Joseph Y Lo; Edgardo I Gimenez; Ruth Walsh; Mary Scott Soo Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: P Skaane; A Skjennald; K Young; E Egge; I Jebsen; E M Sager; B Scheel; E Søvik; A K Ertzaas; S Hofvind; M Abdelnoor Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 1.990