Thick Slices from Tomosynthesis Data Sets: Phantom Study for the Evaluation of Different Algorithms

PURPOSETomosynthesis is a 3-dimensional mammography technique that generates thin slices separated one to the other by typically 1 mm from source data sets. The relatively high image noise in these thin slices raises the value of 1-cm thick slices computed from the set of reconstructed slices for image interpretation. In an initial evaluation, we investigated the potential of different algorithms for generating thick slices from tomosynthesis source data (maximum intensity projection—MIP; average algorithm—AV, and image generation by means of a new algorithm, so-called softMip). The three postprocessing techniques were evaluated using a homogeneous phantom with one textured slab with a total thickness of about 5 cm in which two 0.5-cm-thick slabs contained objects to simulate microcalcifications, spiculated masses, and round masses. The phantom was examined by tomosynthesis (GE Healthcare). Microcalcifications were simulated by inclusion of calcium particles of four different sizes. The slabs containing the inclusions were examined in two different configurations: adjacent to each other and close to the detector and with the two slabs separated by two 1-cm thick breast equivalent material slabs. The reconstructed tomosynthesis slices were postprocessed using MIP, AV, and softMip to generate 1-cm thick slices with a lower noise level. The three postprocessing algorithms were assessed by calculating the resulting contrast versus background for the simulated microcalcifications and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) for the other objects. The CNRs of the simulated round and spiculated masses were most favorable for the thick slices generated with the average algorithm, followed by softMip and MIP. Contrast of the simulated microcalcifications was best for MIP, followed by softMip and average projections. Our results suggest that the additional generation of thick slices may improve the visualization of objects in tomosynthesis. This improvement differs from the different algorithms for microcalcifications, speculated objects, and round masses. SoftMip is a new approach combining features of MIP and average showing image properties in between MIP and AV.

[1]  Luca T. Mainardi,et al.  A Nonrigid Registration of MR Breast Images Using Complex-valued Wavelet Transform , 2007, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[2]  Thomas H. Helbich,et al.  Potential of Dose Reduction After Marker Placement With Full-Field Digital Mammography , 2005, Investigative radiology.

[3]  Rangaraj M. Rangayyan,et al.  Fractal Analysis of Contours of Breast Masses in Mammograms , 2007, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[4]  L L Fajardo,et al.  Radiologists' preferences for digital mammographic display. The International Digital Mammography Development Group. , 2000, Radiology.

[5]  Andrew Smith,et al.  Full-field breast tomosynthesis. , 2005, Radiology management.

[6]  M. Giger,et al.  Computerized mass detection for digital breast tomosynthesis directly from the projection images. , 2006, Medical physics.

[7]  L T Niklason,et al.  Digital breast imaging: tomosynthesis and digital subtraction mammography. , 1998, Breast disease.

[8]  D. Kopans,et al.  Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. , 1997, Radiology.

[9]  Elizabeth A. Krupinski,et al.  Differential Use of Image Enhancement Techniques by Experienced and Inexperienced Observers , 2005, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[10]  C. Beaulieu,et al.  Circular tomosynthesis: potential in imaging of breast and upper cervical spine--preliminary phantom and in vitro study. , 2003, Radiology.

[11]  Lubomir M. Hadjiiski,et al.  A comparative study of limited-angle cone-beam reconstruction methods for breast tomosynthesis. , 2006, Medical physics.

[12]  David Kaeli,et al.  Digital tomosynthesis mammography using a parallel maximum-likelihood reconstruction method , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[13]  Aruna A. Vedula,et al.  A computer simulation study comparing lesion detection accuracy with digital mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and cone-beam CT breast imaging. , 2006, Medical physics.

[14]  Georg M. Stiel,et al.  Potential of digital flashing tomosynthesis for angiocardiographic evaluation , 1992, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[15]  Woo Kyung Moon,et al.  Level Set Contouring for Breast Tumor in Sonography , 2007, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[16]  Carola Werner,et al.  Impact of Breast Density on Computer-Aided Detection in Full-Field Digital Mammography , 2006, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[17]  Kunio Doi,et al.  Usefulness of Texture Analysis for Computerized Classification of Breast Lesions on Mammograms , 2007, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[18]  Patrik Rogalla,et al.  Does Ultra-Low-Dose CT With a Radiation Dose Equivalent to That of KUB Suffice to Detect Renal and Ureteral Calculi? , 2006, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[19]  Robert M. Nishikawa,et al.  Radiologists’ Preferences for Digital Mammographic Display , 2000 .