Literature DB >> 29430473

Dose and diagnostic performance comparison between phase-contrast mammography with synchrotron radiation and digital mammography: a clinical study report.

Christian Fedon1,2, Luigi Rigon1,3, Fulvia Arfelli1,3, Diego Dreossi4, Elisa Quai3, Maura Tonutti5, Giuliana Tromba4, Maria Assunta Cova5,6, Renata Longo1,3.   

Abstract

Two dosimetric quantities [mean glandular dose (MGD) and entrance surface air kerma (ESAK)] and the diagnostic performance of phase-contrast mammography with synchrotron radiation (MSR) are compared to conventional digital mammography (DM). Seventy-one patients (age range, 41 to 82 years) underwent MSR after a DM examination if questionable or suspicious breast abnormalities were not clarified by ultrasonography. The MGD and the ESAK delivered in both examinations were evaluated and compared. Two on-site radiologists rated the images in consensus according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System assessment categories, which were then correlated with the final diagnoses by means of statistical generalized linear models (GLMs). Receiver operating characteristic curves were also used to assess the diagnostic performance by comparing the area under the curve (AUC). An important MGD and ESAK reduction was observed in MSR due to the monoenergetic beam. In particular, an average 43% reduction was observed for the MGD and a reduction of more than 50% for the ESAK. GLM showed higher diagnostic accuracy, especially in terms of specificity, for MSR, confirmed by AUC analysis ([Formula: see text]). The study design implied that the population was characterized by a high prevalence of disease and that the radiologists, who read the DM images before referring the patient to MSR, could have been influenced in their assessments. Within these limitations, the use of synchrotron radiation with the phase-contrast technique applied to mammography showed an important dose reduction and a higher diagnostic accuracy compared with DM. These results could further encourage research on the translation of x-ray phase-contrast imaging into the clinics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast cancer; diagnostic performance; mammography; mean glandular dose; synchrotron radiation; x-ray phase-contrast imaging

Year:  2018        PMID: 29430473      PMCID: PMC5793956          DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.5.1.013503

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)        ISSN: 2329-4302


  34 in total

1.  Glandular breast dose for monoenergetic and high-energy X-ray beams: Monte Carlo assessment.

Authors:  J M Boone
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol.

Authors:  D R Dance; C L Skinner; K C Young; J R Beckett; C J Kotre
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  BI-RADS data should not be used to estimate ROC curves.

Authors:  Yulei Jiang; Charles E Metz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  A simplified edge illumination set-up for quantitative phase contrast mammography with synchrotron radiation at clinical doses.

Authors:  Mariaconcetta Longo; Luigi Rigon; Frances C M Lopez; Rongchang Chen; Diego Dreossi; Fabrizio Zanconati; Renata Longo
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 5.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems.

Authors:  J A Swets
Journal:  Science       Date:  1988-06-03       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  The first analysis and clinical evaluation of native breast tissue using differential phase-contrast mammography.

Authors:  Marco Stampanoni; Zhentian Wang; Thomas Thüring; Christian David; Ewald Roessl; Mafalda Trippel; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Gad Singer; Michael K Hohl; Nik Hauser
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 6.016

7.  Mammography with synchrotron radiation: first clinical experience with phase-detection technique.

Authors:  Edoardo Castelli; Maura Tonutti; Fulvia Arfelli; Renata Longo; Emilio Quaia; Luigi Rigon; Daniela Sanabor; Fabrizio Zanconati; Diego Dreossi; Alessando Abrami; Elisa Quai; Paola Bregant; Katia Casarin; Valentina Chenda; Ralf Hendrik Menk; Tatjana Rokvic; Alessandro Vascotto; Giuliana Tromba; Maria Assunta Cova
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Synchrotron based planar imaging and digital tomosynthesis of breast and biopsy phantoms using a CMOS active pixel sensor.

Authors:  Magdalena B Szafraniec; Anastasios C Konstantinidis; Giuliana Tromba; Diego Dreossi; Sara Vecchio; Luigi Rigon; Nicola Sodini; Steve Naday; Spencer Gunn; Alan McArthur; Alessandro Olivo
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 2.685

9.  Dosimetry in x-ray-based breast imaging.

Authors:  David R Dance; Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-09-12       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  The mammography project at the SYRMEP beamline.

Authors:  D Dreossi; A Abrami; F Arfelli; P Bregant; K Casarin; V Chenda; M A Cova; R Longo; R-H Menk; E Quai; E Quaia; L Rigon; T Rokvic; D Sanabor; M Tonutti; G Tromba; A Vascotto; F Zanconati; E Castelli
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2008-07-09       Impact factor: 3.528

View more
  7 in total

1.  Monochromatic breast computed tomography with synchrotron radiation: phase-contrast and phase-retrieved image comparison and full-volume reconstruction.

Authors:  Luca Brombal; Bruno Golosio; Fulvia Arfelli; Deborah Bonazza; Adriano Contillo; Pasquale Delogu; Sandro Donato; Giovanni Mettivier; Piernicola Oliva; Luigi Rigon; Angelo Taibi; Giuliana Tromba; Fabrizio Zanconati; Renata Longo
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-11-27

2.  Radiochromic film dosimetry in synchrotron radiation breast computed tomography: a phantom study.

Authors:  Giovanni Mettivier; Marica Masi; Fulvia Arfelli; Luca Brombal; Pasquale Delogu; Francesca Di Lillo; Sandro Donato; Christian Fedon; Bruno Golosio; Piernicola Oliva; Luigi Rigon; Antonio Sarno; Angelo Taibi; Paolo Russo
Journal:  J Synchrotron Radiat       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 2.616

3.  Development and preclinical evaluation of a patient-specific high energy x-ray phase sensitive breast tomosynthesis system.

Authors:  Muhammad U Ghani; Xizeng Wu; Laurie L Fajardo; Zhengxue Jing; Molly D Wong; Bin Zheng; Farid Omoumi; Yuhua Li; Aimin Yan; Peter Jenkins; Stephen L Hillis; Laura Linstroth; Hong Liu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Comparison of a personalized breast dosimetry method with standard dosimetry protocols.

Authors:  Elisabeth Salomon; Peter Homolka; Friedrich Semturs; Michael Figl; Michael Gruber; Johann Hummel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-04-10       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Dose and spatial resolution analysis of grating-based phase-contrast mammography using an inverse Compton x-ray source.

Authors:  Lisa Heck; Elena Eggl; Susanne Grandl; Martin Dierolf; Christoph Jud; Benedikt Günther; Klaus Achterhold; Doris Mayr; Bernhard Gleich; Karin Hellerhoff; Franz Pfeiffer; Julia Herzen
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2020-04-22

6.  Experimental optimization of the energy for breast-CT with synchrotron radiation.

Authors:  Piernicola Oliva; Vittorio Di Trapani; Fulvia Arfelli; Luca Brombal; Sandro Donato; Bruno Golosio; Renata Longo; Giovanni Mettivier; Luigi Rigon; Angelo Taibi; Giuliana Tromba; Fabrizio Zanconati; Pasquale Delogu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Motion artifacts assessment and correction using optical tracking in synchrotron radiation breast CT.

Authors:  Luca Brombal; Lucia Mariel Arana Peña; Fulvia Arfelli; Renata Longo; Francesco Brun; Adriano Contillo; Francesca Di Lillo; Giuliana Tromba; Vittorio Di Trapani; Sandro Donato; Ralf Hendrik Menk; Luigi Rigon
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-07-29       Impact factor: 4.506

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.