Generalized Filtered Back-Projection Reconstruction in Breast Tomosynthesis

Tomosynthesis reconstruction that produces high-quality images is a difficult problem, due mainly to the highly incomplete data. In this work we present a motivation for the generalized filtered backprojection (GFBP) approach to tomosynthesis reconstruction. This approach is fast (since non-iterative), flexible, and results in reconstructions with an image quality that is similar or superior to reconstructions that are mathematically optimal. Results based on synthetic data and patient data are presented.

[1]  Jeffrey W. Eberhard,et al.  New method for 3D reconstruction in digital tomosynthesis , 2002, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[2]  M. Giger,et al.  Computerized analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns for breast cancer risk assessment: feature selection. , 2000, Medical physics.

[3]  Kenneth E. Barner,et al.  Algebraic tomosynthesis reconstruction , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[4]  Tao Wu,et al.  A comparison of reconstruction algorithms for breast tomosynthesis. , 2004, Medical physics.

[5]  H Yoshida,et al.  Optimally weighted wavelet transform based on supervised training for detection of microcalcifications in digital mammograms. , 1998, Medical physics.

[6]  Evangelos Dermatas,et al.  Fast detection of masses in computer-aided mammography , 2000, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[7]  L. Clarke,et al.  Tree structured wavelet transform segmentation of microcalcifications in digital mammography. , 1995, Medical physics.

[8]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[9]  L Li,et al.  HYBRID CLASSIFICATION METHOD FOR FALSEPOSITIVE REDUCTION IN CAD FOR MASS DETECTION , 2000 .

[10]  James T Dobbins,et al.  Digital x-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potential. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  Matthew A. Kupinski,et al.  Feature selection and classifiers for the computerized detection of mass lesions in digital mammography , 1997, Proceedings of International Conference on Neural Networks (ICNN'97).

[12]  T. M. Kolb,et al.  Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US--diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. , 1998, Radiology.

[13]  Heang-Ping Chan,et al.  Mammography Tomosynthesis System for High Performance 3D Imaging , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[14]  D. Kopans.  The positive predictive value of mammography. , 1992, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  Serge Muller,et al.  Preference Study of Reconstructed Image Quality in Mammographic Tomosynthesis , 2003 .

[16]  Alessandro Bevilacqua,et al.  Automatic detection of clustered microcalcifications using a combined method and an SVM classifier , 2007 .

[17]  D. K. Cullers,et al.  Multiresolution statistical analysis of high-resolution digital mammograms , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[18]  M J Yaffe,et al.  Thickness-equalization processing for mammographic images. , 1997, Radiology.

[19]  Maryellen L. Giger,et al.  Computer-Aided Diagnosis in Mammography , 2000 .

[20]  C J D'Orsi,et al.  Evaluation of linear and nonlinear tomosynthetic reconstruction methods in digital mammography. , 2001, Academic radiology.

[21]  Michael Brady,et al.  Mammographic Image Analysis , 1999, Computational Imaging and Vision.

[22]  C E Floyd,et al.  Segmentation of suspicious clustered microcalcifications in mammograms. , 2000, Medical physics.

[23]  S. Lai,et al.  On techniques for detecting circumscribed masses in mammograms. , 1989, IEEE transactions on medical imaging.

[24]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Normalization of local contrast in mammograms , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[25]  N. Petrick,et al.  Computerized characterization of masses on mammograms: the rubber band straightening transform and texture analysis. , 1998, Medical physics.

[26]  C J D'Orsi,et al.  Comparison of tomosynthesis methods used with digital mammography. , 2000, Academic radiology.

[27]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Detection of stellate distortions in mammograms , 1996, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[28]  D. Kopans,et al.  Tomographic mammography using a limited number of low-dose cone-beam projection images. , 2003, Medical physics.

[29]  N. Petrick,et al.  Classification of mass and normal breast tissue on digital mammograms: multiresolution texture analysis. , 1995, Medical physics.

[30]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. , 1995, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[31]  A. Stavros,et al.  Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. , 1995, Radiology.