Literature DB >> 27264914

Automated Breast Ultrasound: Dual-Sided Compared with Single-Sided Imaging.

Eric D Larson1, Won-Mean Lee1, Marilyn A Roubidoux1, Mitchel M Goodsitt1, Chris Lashbrook1, Fouzaan Zafar1, Oliver D Kripfgans1, Kai Thomenius2, Paul L Carson3.   

Abstract

The design and performance of a mammographically configured, dual-sided, automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) 3-D imaging system are described. Dual-sided imaging (superior and inferior) is compared with single-sided imaging to aid decisions on clinical implementation of the more complex, but potentially higher-quality dual-sided imaging. Marked improvement in image quality and coverage of the breast is obtained in dual-sided ultrasound over single-sided ultrasound. Among hypo-echoic masses imaged, there are increases in the mean contrast-to-noise ratio of 57% and 79%, respectively, for spliced dual-sided versus superior or inferior single-sided imaging. The fractional breast volume coverage, defined as the percentage volume in the transducer field of view that is imaged with clinically acceptable quality, is improved from 59% in both superior and inferior single-sided imaging to 89% in dual-sided imaging. Applying acoustic coupling to the breast requires more effort or sophisticated methods in dual-sided imaging than in single-sided imaging.
Copyright © 2016 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3-D imaging; Automated breast ultrasound; Cephalocaudal; Compression; Mammography; Medial lateral oblique

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27264914      PMCID: PMC5047064          DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.05.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol        ISSN: 0301-5629            Impact factor:   2.998


  29 in total

1.  Combination of digital mammography with semi-automated 3D breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Ajay Kapur; Paul L Carson; Jeffrey Eberhard; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Kai Thomenius; Murtuza Lokhandwalla; Donald Buckley; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Mark A Helvie; Rebecca C Booi; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Ramon Q Erkamp; Heang-Ping Chan; J Brian Fowlkes; Jerry A Thomas; Cynthia E Landberg
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2004-08

2.  Fischer's Fused Full Field Digital Mammography and Ultrasound System (FFDMUS).

Authors:  Jasjit S Suri; Tim Danielson; Yujun Guo; Roman Janer
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2005

3.  Automatic registration of 3-D ultrasound images.

Authors:  R N Rohling; A H Gee; L Berman
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.998

4.  Whole Breast Ultrasound: Comparison of the Visibility of Suspicious Lesions with Automated Breast Volumetric Scanning Versus Hand-Held Breast Ultrasound.

Authors:  Cherie M Kuzmiak; Eun Y Ko; Laura A Tuttle; Doreen Steed; Donglin Zeng; Sora C Yoon
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 5.  Automated whole breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Stuart S Kaplan
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.303

6.  Effect of a gel retainment dam on automated ultrasound coverage in a dual-modality breast imaging system.

Authors:  Jie Li; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Frederic Padilla; J Brian Fowlkes; Fong Ming Hooi; Christine R Lashbrook; Kai E Thomenius; Paul L Carson
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.153

7.  Spatial registration of temporally separated whole breast 3D ultrasound images.

Authors:  Ganesh Narayanasamy; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Marilyn Roubidoux; J Brian Fowlkes; Anne F Schott; Paul L Carson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  Understanding patient options, utilization patterns, and burdens associated with breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Susan C Harvey; Ashok Vegesna; Sharon Mass; Janice Clarke; Alexandria Skoufalos
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.681

9.  Breast mass characterization using 3-dimensional automated ultrasound as an adjunct to digital breast tomosynthesis: a pilot study.

Authors:  Frederic Padilla; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Chintana Paramagul; Sumedha P Sinha; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Gerald L Le Carpentier; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; J Brian Fowlkes; Annette D Joe; Katherine A Klein; Alexis V Nees; Mitra Noroozian; Stephanie K Patterson; Renee W Pinsky; Fong Ming Hooi; Paul L Carson
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.153

10.  The clinical utility of automated breast volume scanner: a pilot study of 139 cases.

Authors:  Young Wook Kim; Seon Kwang Kim; Hyun Jo Youn; Eun Jung Choi; Sung Hoo Jung
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 3.588

View more
  3 in total

1.  Preliminary Clinical Experience with a Combined Automated Breast Ultrasound and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis System.

Authors:  Eric D Larson; Won-Mean Lee; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Chris Lashbrook; Cynthia E Davis; Oliver D Kripfgans; Paul L Carson
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 2.998

2.  A computer-assisted system for handheld whole-breast ultrasonography.

Authors:  Filip Šroubek; Michal Bartoš; Jan Schier; Zuzana Bílková; Barbara Zitová; Jan Vydra; Iva Macová; Jan Daneš; Lukáš Lambert
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Acoustic beam anomalies in automated breast imaging.

Authors:  Rungroj Jintamethasawat; Xiaohui Zhang; Paul L Carson; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Oliver D Kripfgans
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-10-12
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.