Literature DB >> 25348098

Extra patient movement during mammographic imaging: an experimental study.

W K Ma1, D Brettle, D Howard, J Kelly, S Millington, P Hogg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine if movement external to the patient occurring during mammography may be a source of image blur.
METHODS: Four mammography machines with eight flexible and eight fixed paddles were evaluated. In the first stage, movement at the paddle was measured mechanically using two calibrated linear potentiometers. A deformable breast phantom was used to mimic a female breast. For each paddle, the movement in millimetres and change in compression force in Newton was recorded at 0.5- and 1-s intervals, respectively, for 40 s with the phantom in an initially compressed state under a load of 80 N. In the second stage, clinical audit on 28 females was conducted on one mammography machine with the 18 × 24- and 24 × 29-cm flexible paddles.
RESULTS: Movement at the paddle followed an exponential decay with a settling period of approximately 40 s. The compression force readings for both fixed and flexible paddles decreased exponentially with time, while fixed paddles had a larger drop in compression force than did flexible paddles. There is a linear relationship between movement at the paddle and change in compression force.
CONCLUSION: Movement measured at the paddle during an exposure can be represented by a second order system. The amount of extra patient movement during the actual exposure can be estimated using the linear relationship between movement at the paddle and the change in compression force. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This research provides a possible explanation to mammography image blurring caused by extra patient movement and proposes a theoretical model to analyse the movement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25348098      PMCID: PMC4243204          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20140241

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  4 in total

1.  The readout thickness versus the measured thickness for a range of screen film mammography and full-field digital mammography units.

Authors:  Ingrid H R Hauge; Peter Hogg; Katy Szczepura; Paul Connolly; George McGill; Claire Mercer
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Comparison of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography: image quality and lesion detection.

Authors:  A Fischmann; K C Siegmann; A Wersebe; C D Claussen; M Müller-Schimpfle
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Does subcutaneous adipose tissue behave as an (anti-)thixotropic material?

Authors:  Marion Geerligs; Gerrit W M Peters; Paul A J Ackermans; Cees W J Oomens; Frank P T Baaijens
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Mammographic artifacts on full-field digital mammography.

Authors:  Jae Jeong Choi; Sung Hun Kim; Bong Joo Kang; Byung Gil Choi; ByungJoo Song; Haijo Jung
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.056

  4 in total
  3 in total

1.  Analysis of motion during the breast clamping phase of mammography.

Authors:  Wang Kei Ma; Mark F McEntee; Claire Mercer; Judith Kelly; Sara Millington; Peter Hogg
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  What is the minimum amount of simulated breast movement required for visual detection of blurring? An exploratory investigation.

Authors:  W K Ma; R Aspin; J Kelly; S Millington; P Hogg
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Blurred digital mammography images: an analysis of technical recall and observer detection performance.

Authors:  Wang Kei Ma; Rita Borgen; Judith Kelly; Sara Millington; Beverley Hilton; Rob Aspin; Carla Lança; Peter Hogg
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 3.039

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.