Literature DB >> 28151728

Optimization of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) acquisition parameters for human observers: effect of reconstruction algorithms.

Rongping Zeng, Aldo Badano, Kyle J Myers.   

Abstract

We showed in our earlier work that the choice of reconstruction methods does not affect the optimization of DBT acquisition parameters (angular span and number of views) using simulated breast phantom images in detecting lesions with a channelized Hotelling observer (CHO). In this work we investigate whether the model-observer based conclusion is valid when using humans to interpret images. We used previously generated DBT breast phantom images and recruited human readers to find the optimal geometry settings associated with two reconstruction algorithms, filtered back projection (FBP) and simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique (SART). The human reader results show that image quality trends as a function of the acquisition parameters are consistent between FBP and SART reconstructions. The consistent trends confirm that the optimization of DBT system geometry is insensitive to the choice of reconstruction algorithm. The results also show that humans perform better in SART reconstructed images than in FBP reconstructed images. In addition, we applied CHOs with three commonly used channel models, Laguerre-Gauss (LG) channels, square (SQR) channels and sparse difference-of-Gaussian (sDOG) channels. We found that LG channels predict human performance trends better than SQR and sDOG channel models for the task of detecting lesions in tomosynthesis backgrounds. Overall, this work confirms that the choice of reconstruction algorithm is not critical for optimizing DBT system acquisition parameters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28151728      PMCID: PMC5541400          DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aa5ddc

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  19 in total

1.  Image quality of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis: effects of projection-view distributions.

Authors:  Yao Lu; Heang-Ping Chan; Jun Wei; Mitch Goodsitt; Paul L Carson; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Andrea Schmitz; Jeffrey W Eberhard; Bernhard E H Claus
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise.

Authors:  I Reiser; R M Nishikawa
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  Breast tomosynthesis: state-of-the-art and review of the literature.

Authors:  Jay A Baker; Joseph Y Lo
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Optimized image acquisition for breast tomosynthesis in projection and reconstruction space.

Authors:  Amarpreet S Chawla; Joseph Y Lo; Jay A Baker; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 5.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part II. Image reconstruction, processing and analysis, and advanced applications.

Authors:  Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 6.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part I. The image acquisition process.

Authors:  Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance of clustered microcalcification detection on breast phantom images acquired with an experimental system using variable scan angles, angular increments, and number of projection views.

Authors:  Heang-Ping Chan; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Mark A Helvie; Scott Zelakiewicz; Andrea Schmitz; Mitra Noroozian; Chintana Paramagul; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Alexis V Nees; Colleen H Neal; Paul Carson; Yao Lu; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Jun Wei
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: studies of the effects of acquisition geometry on contrast-to-noise ratio and observer preference of low-contrast objects in breast phantom images.

Authors:  Mitchell M Goodsitt; Heang-Ping Chan; Andrea Schmitz; Scott Zelakiewicz; Santosh Telang; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Kuanwong Watcharotone; Mark A Helvie; Chintana Paramagul; Colleen Neal; Emmanuel Christodoulou; Sandra C Larson; Paul L Carson
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Correlation between human and model observer performance for discrimination task in CT.

Authors:  Yi Zhang; Shuai Leng; Lifeng Yu; Rickey E Carter; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Correlation between model observer and human observer performance in CT imaging when lesion location is uncertain.

Authors:  Shuai Leng; Lifeng Yu; Yi Zhang; Rickey Carter; Alicia Y Toledano; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  9 in total

1.  The role of extra-foveal processing in 3D imaging.

Authors:  Miguel P Eckstein; Miguel A Lago; Craig K Abbey
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2017-03-10

2.  Virtual assessment of stereoscopic viewing of digital breast tomosynthesis projection images.

Authors:  Gezheng Wen; Ho-Chang Chang; Jacob Reinhold; Joseph Y Lo; Mia K Markey
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-01-17

3.  Optimization of the difference-of-Gaussian channel sets for the channelized Hotelling observer.

Authors:  Christiana Balta; Ramona W Bouwman; Mireille J M Broeders; Nico Karssemeijer; Wouter J H Veldkamp; Ioannis Sechopoulos; Ruben E van Engen
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2019-09-27

4.  Computational reader design and statistical performance evaluation of an in-silico imaging clinical trial comparing digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammography.

Authors:  Rongping Zeng; Frank W Samuelson; Diksha Sharma; Andreu Badal; Graff G Christian; Stephen J Glick; Kyle J Myers; Aldo Badano
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2020-02-26

5.  Medical image quality metrics for foveated model observers.

Authors:  Miguel A Lago; Craig K Abbey; Miguel P Eckstein
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-08-16

6.  Foveated Model Observers for Visual Search in 3D Medical Images.

Authors:  Miguel A Lago; Craig K Abbey; Miguel P Eckstein
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 10.048

7.  Human observer performance on in-plane digital breast tomosynthesis images: Effects of reconstruction filters and data acquisition angles on signal detection.

Authors:  Changwoo Lee; Minah Han; Jongduk Baek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Effect of optical blurring of X-ray source on breast tomosynthesis image quality: Modulation transfer function, anatomical noise power spectrum, and signal detectability perspectives.

Authors:  Changwoo Lee; Jongduk Baek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Evaluation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis as Replacement of Full-Field Digital Mammography Using an In Silico Imaging Trial.

Authors:  Aldo Badano; Christian G Graff; Andreu Badal; Diksha Sharma; Rongping Zeng; Frank W Samuelson; Stephen J Glick; Kyle J Myers
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2018-11-02
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.