Measurement of breast lesion display luminance and overall image display luminance relative to optimum luminance for contrast perception

Introduction: To minimize fatigue due to eye adaptation and maximize contrast perception, it has been suggested that lesion luminance be matched to overall image luminance to perceive the greatest number of grey level differences. This work examines whether lesion display luminance matches the overall image and breast tissue display luminance and whether these factors are positioned within the optimum luminance for maximal contrast sensitivity. Methods: A set of 42 mammograms, collected from 21 patients and containing 15 malignant and 6 benign lesions, was used to assess overall image luminance. Each image displayed on the monitor was divided into 16 equal regions. The luminance at the midpoint of each region was measured using a calibrated photometer and the overall image luminance was calculated. Average breast tissue display luminance was calculated from the subset of regions containing of only breast tissue. Lesion display luminance was compared with both overall image display luminance and average breast tissue display luminance. Results: Statistically significant differences (p<0.0001) were noted between overall image display luminance (4.3±0.7 cd/m2) and lesion display luminance (15.0±6.8 cd/m2); and between average breast tissue display luminance (6.8±1.3 cd/m2) and lesion display luminance (p<0.002). Conclusions: Lesion luminance was significantly higher than the overall image and breast tissue luminance. Luminance of lesions and general breast tissue fell below the optimum luminance range for contrast perception. Breast lesion detection sensitivity and specificity may be enhanced by use of brighter monitor displays.

[1]  Alex Ryer,et al.  Light measurement handbook , 2013 .

[2]  John Ryan,et al.  Optimization of region of interest luminances may enhance radiologists' light adaptation. , 2008, Academic radiology.

[3]  Luigi Albani,et al.  Grayscale standard display function on LCD color monitors , 2007, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[4]  S. Shapiro,et al.  Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. , 1982, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[5]  R A Normann,et al.  The effect of extraneous light on lesion detectability. A demonstration. , 1983, Investigative radiology.

[6]  A Badano,et al.  High-fidelity electronic display of digital radiographs. , 1999, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[7]  David J Manning,et al.  Ambient lighting: effect of illumination on soft-copy viewing of radiographs of the wrist. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[8]  Jane Warwick,et al.  Time‐dependent effects on survival in breast carcinoma , 2004, Cancer.

[9]  A Dubreuil,et al.  Influence of Abnormal Screens on Delays and Prognostic Indicators of Screen-Detected Breast Carcinoma , 2004, Journal of medical screening.

[10]  John Harding,et al.  Cancer survival and prevalence in Australia: cancers diagnosed from 1982 to 2004 , 2008 .

[11]  H E Rockette,et al.  Effects of luminance and resolution on observer performance with chest radiographs. , 2000, Radiology.

[12]  Bruce I. Reiner,et al.  Redesigning the PACS reading room: optimizing monitor and room lighting , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[13]  Mathias Prokop,et al.  Soft-Copy Reading of Digital Chest Radiographs: Effect of Ambient Light and Automatic Optimization of Monitor Luminance , 2005, Investigative radiology.

[14]  C J Vyborny,et al.  Mammography as a radiographic examination: an overview. , 1989, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[15]  Jerzy Kanicki,et al.  High-Fidelity Medical Imaging Displays , 2004 .

[16]  K. Robson,et al.  An investigation into the effects of suboptimal viewing conditions in screen-film mammography. , 2008, The British journal of radiology.

[17]  Michael F. McNitt-Gray,et al.  An automatic method for enhancing the display of different tissue densities in digital chest radiographs , 2009, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[18]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: technological and psychophysical considerations for digital mammographic displays. , 2005, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[19]  Peter Homolka,et al.  Impact of ambient light and window settings on the detectability of catheters on soft-copy display of chest radiographs at bedside. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  Michael J. Flynn,et al.  Visual Requirements for High-Fidelity Display 1 , 2003 .

[21]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: executive summary of AAPM TG18 report. , 2005, Medical physics.

[22]  G Cardenosa,et al.  Assessing adequacy of mammographic image quality. , 1994, Radiology.

[23]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  A method for reduction of eye fatigue by optimizing the ambient light conditions in radiology reading rooms , 2006, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[24]  L. Tabár,et al.  The natural history of breast carcinoma , 1999, Cancer.

[25]  Mathias Prokop,et al.  Detectability of catheters on bedside chest radiographs: comparison between liquid crystal display and high-resolution cathode-ray tube monitors. , 2005, Radiology.