Literature DB >> 31646153

Objective assessment of task performance: a comparison of two FFDM detectors using an anthropomorphic breast phantom.

Andrey Makeev1, Lynda C Ikejimba1, Jesse Salad2, Stephen J Glick1.   

Abstract

Current digital mammography systems primarily employ one of two types of detectors: indirect conversion, typically using a cesium-iodine scintillator integrated with an amorphous silicon photodiode matrix, or direct conversion, using a photoconductive layer of amorphous selenium (a-Se) combined with thin-film transistor array. The goal of this study was to evaluate a methodology for objectively assessing image quality to compare human observer task performance in detecting microcalcification clusters and extended mass-like lesions achieved with different detector types. The proposed assessment methodology uses a novel anthropomorphic breast phantom fabricated with ink-jet printing. In addition to human observer detection performance, standard linear metrics such as modulation transfer function, noise power spectrum, and detective quantum efficiency (DQE) were also measured to assess image quality. An Analogic Anrad AXS-2430 a-Se detector used in a commercial FFDM/DBT system and a Teledyne Dalsa Xineos-2329 with CMOS pixel readout were evaluated and compared. The DQE of each detector was similar over a range of exposures. Similar task performance in detecting microcalcifications and masses was observed between the two detectors over a range of clinically applicable dose levels, with some perplexing differences in the detection of microcalcifications at the lowest dose measurement. The evaluation approach presented seems promising as a new technique for objective assessment of breast imaging technology.
© 2019 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE).

Entities:  

Keywords:  FFDM detector; anthropomorphic breast phantom; detective quantum efficiency; lesion detection; microcalcification detection

Year:  2019        PMID: 31646153      PMCID: PMC6797062          DOI: 10.1117/1.JMI.6.4.043503

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


  31 in total

1.  An experimental comparison of detector performance for direct and indirect digital radiography systems.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; Michael J Flynn
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Quantification of breast density with spectral mammography based on a scanned multi-slit photon-counting detector: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Huanjun Ding; Sabee Molloi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Generalized DQE analysis of radiographic and dual-energy imaging using flat-panel detectors.

Authors:  S Richard; J H Siewerdsen; D A Jaffray; D J Moseley; B Bakhtiar
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Dose dependence of mass and microcalcification detection in digital mammography: free response human observer studies.

Authors:  Mark Ruschin; Pontus Timberg; Magnus Båth; Bengt Hemdal; Tony Svahn; Rob S Saunders; Ehsan Samei; Ingvar Andersson; Soren Mattsson; Dev P Chakrabort; Anders Tingber
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  The Swedish randomised mammography screening trials: analysis of their effect on the breast cancer related excess mortality.

Authors:  L G Larsson; L Nyström; S Wall; L Rutqvist; I Andersson; N Bjurstam; G Fagerberg; J Frisell; L Tabár
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.136

6.  Energy weighting improves dose efficiency in clinical practice: implementation on a spectral photon-counting mammography system.

Authors:  Johan Berglund; Henrik Johansson; Mats Lundqvist; Björn Cederström; Erik Fredenberg
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-08-28

7.  Design and application of a structured phantom for detection performance comparison between breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography.

Authors:  L Cockmartin; N W Marshall; G Zhang; K Lemmens; E Shaheen; C Van Ongeval; E Fredenberg; D R Dance; E Salvagnini; K Michielsen; H Bosmans
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Breast composition measurement with a cadmium-zinc-telluride based spectral computed tomography system.

Authors:  Huanjun Ding; Justin L Ducote; Sabee Molloi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano; Constantine Gatsonis; Edward Hendrick; Martin Yaffe; Janet K Baum; Suddhasatta Acharyya; Emily F Conant; Laurie L Fajardo; Lawrence Bassett; Carl D'Orsi; Roberta Jong; Murray Rebner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  The incidence of fatal breast cancer measures the increased effectiveness of therapy in women participating in mammography screening.

Authors:  László Tabár; Peter B Dean; Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen; Amy Ming-Fang Yen; Sam Li-Sheng Chen; Jean Ching-Yuan Fann; Sherry Yueh-Hsia Chiu; May Mei-Sheng Ku; Wendy Yi-Ying Wu; Chen-Yang Hsu; Yu-Ching Chen; Kerri Beckmann; Robert A Smith; Stephen W Duffy
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  1 in total

1.  Characterization of a GaAs photon-counting detector for mammography.

Authors:  Bahaa Ghammraoui; Spyridon Gkoumas; Stephen J Glick
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-06-22
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.