Detectability comparison of simulated objects within a dense breast phantom using high energy x-ray phase sensitive and conventional imaging systems

The objective of this study was to compare the detectability of simulated objects within a dense breast phantom using high energy x-rays for phase sensitive breast imaging in comparison with a conventional imaging system. A 5 cm thick phantom was used which represented a compressed breast consisting of 70% glandular and 30% adipose tissue ratio in non-uniform background. The phantom had a 6 × 6 matrix of holes with milled depths ranging from 1 to 0.1 mm and diameters ranging from 4.25 to 0.25 mm representing simulated tumors. The in-line phase sensitive prototype was equipped with a micro-focus x-ray source and a flat panel detector with a 50 μm pixel pitch, both mounted on an optical rail. Phase contrast image of the phantom was acquired at 120 kVp, 4.5 mAs at source to object distance (SOD) of 68 cm and source to image detector distance (SIDD) of 170 cm with a geometric magnification (M) of 2.5. A 2.5 mm aluminum (Al) filter was used for beam hardening. The conventional image was acquired using the same porotype with the phantom in contact with the detector at 40 kVp, 12.5 mAs under SID = 68 cm. The mean glandular dose (Dg) for both the acquisitions was 1.3 mGy. The observer study and CNR analyses indicated that the phase contrast image had higher disk detectability as compared to the conventional image. The edge enhancement provided by the phase sensitive images warrants in identifying boundaries of malignant tissues and in providing optimal results in phase retrieval process. The potential demonstrated by this study for imaging a dense breast with a high energy phase sensitive x-ray imaging to improve tumor detection in warrants further investigation of this technique.

[1]  S. Wilkins,et al.  Contrast and resolution in imaging with a microfocus x-ray source , 1997 .

[2]  Xizeng Wu,et al.  Low dose high energy x-ray in-line phase sensitive imaging prototype: Investigation of optimal geometric conditions and design parameters. , 2015, Journal of X-ray science and technology.

[3]  L L Fajardo,et al.  Contrast-detail detectability analysis: comparison of a digital spot mammography system and an analog screen-film mammography system. , 1997, Academic radiology.

[4]  A. Paterson,et al.  Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. , 2005, The Lancet. Oncology.

[5]  D. Vanel The American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System (BI-RADS): a step towards a universal radiological language? , 2007, European journal of radiology.

[6]  S. Wilkins,et al.  Phase-contrast imaging using polychromatic hard X-rays , 1996, Nature.

[7]  Bin Zheng,et al.  Characterization of a high-energy in-line phase contrast tomosynthesis prototype. , 2015, Medical physics.

[8]  Hong Liu,et al.  Clinical implementation of x-ray phase-contrast imaging: theoretical foundations and design considerations. , 2003, Medical physics.

[9]  Etta D Pisano,et al.  Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. , 2012, JAMA.

[10]  Andrew Karellas,et al.  Lesion detectability considerations for an optically-coupled CCD X-ray imaging system , 1993 .

[11]  Aimin Yan,et al.  Dose and detectability improvements with high energy phase sensitive x-ray imaging in comparison to low energy conventional imaging , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Jennifer A Harvey,et al.  Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. , 2004, Radiology.

[13]  V. McCormack,et al.  Breast Density and Parenchymal Patterns as Markers of Breast Cancer Risk: A Meta-analysis , 2006, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[14]  W. Sobol,et al.  Parametrization of mammography normalized average glandular dose tables. , 1997, Medical physics.

[15]  Xizeng Wu,et al.  A general theoretical formalism for X-ray phase contrast imaging. , 2003, Journal of X-ray science and technology.

[16]  Norman Boyd,et al.  The Association of Measured Breast Tissue Characteristics with Mammographic Density and Other Risk Factors for Breast Cancer , 2005, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[17]  J. Boone Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for arbitrary X-ray spectra in mammography: computer-fit values of Monte Carlo derived data. , 2002, Medical physics.

[18]  A. Miller,et al.  Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. , 1995, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[19]  Hong Liu,et al.  Phase-space evolution of x-ray coherence in phase-sensitive imaging. , 2008, Applied optics.

[20]  G. Barnes,et al.  Normalized average glandular dose in molybdenum target-rhodium filter and rhodium target-rhodium filter mammography. , 1994, Radiology.

[21]  N. Boyd,et al.  Mammographic density. Potential mechanisms of breast cancer risk associated with mammographic density: hypotheses based on epidemiological evidence , 2008, Breast Cancer Research.

[22]  P. Narula MAMMOGRAPHIC DENSITY AND THE RISK AND DETECTION OF BREAST CANCER , 2016 .

[23]  T. M. Kolb,et al.  Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. , 2002, Radiology.

[24]  N W Marshall,et al.  A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[25]  C A Kelsey,et al.  Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. , 1998, Radiology.

[26]  A. Rose The sensitivity performance of the human eye on an absolute scale. , 1948, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[27]  Srinivasan Vedantham,et al.  Flat-panel digital mammography system: contrast-detail comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images. , 2002, Radiology.