Digital breast tomosynthesis: studies of the effects of acquisition geometry on contrast-to-noise ratio and observer preference of low-contrast objects in breast phantom images

The effect of acquisition geometry in digital breast tomosynthesis was evaluated with studies of contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) and observer preference. Contrast-detail (CD) test objects in 5 cm thick phantoms with breast-like backgrounds were imaged. Twelve different angular acquisitions (average glandular dose for each ~1.1 mGy) were performed ranging from narrow angle 16° with 17 projection views (16d17p) to wide angle 64d17p. Focal slices of SART-reconstructed images of the CD arrays were selected for CNR computations and the reader preference study. For the latter, pairs of images obtained with different acquisition geometries were randomized and scored by 7 trained readers. The total scores for all images and readings for each acquisition geometry were compared as were the CNRs. In general, readers preferred images acquired with wide angle as opposed to narrow angle geometries. The mean percent preferred was highly correlated with tomosynthesis angle (R = 0.91). The highest scoring geometries were 60d21p (95%), 64d17p (80%), and 48d17p (72%); the lowest scoring were 16d17p (4%), 24d9p (17%) and 24d13p (33%). The measured CNRs for the various acquisitions showed much overlap but were overall highest for wide-angle acquisitions. Finally, the mean reader scores were well correlated with the mean CNRs (R = 0.83).

[1]  C. D'Orsi,et al.  Computation of the glandular radiation dose in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. , 2006, Medical physics.

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

[3]  A. Badano,et al.  Oblique incidence effects in direct x-ray detectors: a first-order approximation using a physics-based analytical model. , 2011, Medical physics.

[4]  J Yorkston,et al.  Optimal kvp selection for dual-energy imaging of the chest: evaluation by task-specific observer preference tests. , 2007, Medical physics.

[5]  Heang-Ping Chan,et al.  High-speed large angle mammography tomosynthesis system , 2006, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[6]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Optimized image acquisition for breast tomosynthesis in projection and reconstruction space. , 2009, Medical physics.

[7]  Paola Coan,et al.  X-ray phase-contrast imaging: from pre-clinical applications towards clinics , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  John M. Boone,et al.  Task-based performance analysis of FBP, SART and ML for digital breast tomosynthesis using signal CNR and Channelised Hotelling Observers , 2011, Medical Image Anal..

[9]  Kevin W Eliceiri,et al.  NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis , 2012, Nature Methods.

[10]  Otto Zhou,et al.  Dependency of image quality on system configuration parameters in a stationary digital breast tomosynthesis system. , 2013, Medical physics.

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

[12]  Robert M. Nishikawa,et al.  A new approach to digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening , 2007, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[13]  Mini Das,et al.  Optimizing breast-tomosynthesis acquisition parameters with scanning model observers , 2008, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[14]  R M Nishikawa,et al.  Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise. , 2010, Medical physics.

[15]  Robert M. Nishikawa,et al.  Effect of non-isotropic detector blur on microcalcification detectability in tomosynthesis , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[16]  Lubomir M. Hadjiiski,et al.  Image quality of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis: effects of projection-view distributions. , 2011, Medical physics.

[17]  A. Badano,et al.  A fast, angle-dependent, analytical model of CsI detector response for optimization of 3D x-ray breast imaging systems. , 2010, Medical physics.

[18]  Otto Zhou,et al.  Optimizing configuration parameters of a stationary digital breast tomosynthesis system based on carbon nanotube x-ray sources , 2012, Medical Imaging.

[19]  Hong-Jun Yoon,et al.  Comparative analysis of data collection methods for individualized modeling of radiologists' visual similarity judgments in mammograms. , 2013, Academic radiology.

[20]  J. Baker,et al.  A mathematical model platform for optimizing a multiprojection breast imaging system. , 2008, Medical physics.

[21]  Bo Zhao,et al.  Image artifacts in digital breast tomosynthesis: investigation of the effects of system geometry and reconstruction parameters using a linear system approach. , 2008, Medical physics.

[22]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Calculation of OTF, NPS, and DQE for Oblique X-Ray Incidence on Turbid Granular Phosphors , 2010, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[23]  Andrew Maidment,et al.  Evaluation of a photon-counting breast tomosynthesis imaging system , 2005, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[24]  Andriy I. Bandos,et al.  Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. , 2013, Radiology.

[25]  Yiheng Zhang,et al.  The CNR method in scan angle optimization of tomosynthesis and its limitations , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[26]  S. Rose,et al.  Implementation of breast tomosynthesis in a routine screening practice: an observational study. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[27]  J H Siewerdsen,et al.  Anatomical background and generalized detectability in tomosynthesis and cone-beam CT. , 2010, Medical physics.

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

[29]  I. Sechopoulos.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part I. The image acquisition process. , 2013, Medical physics.

[30]  Michael P. Kempston,et al.  Resolution at oblique incidence angles of a flat panel imager for breast tomosynthesis. , 2006, Medical physics.

[31]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  A virtual trial framework for quantifying the detectability of masses in breast tomosynthesis projection data. , 2013, Medical physics.

[32]  Bo Zhao,et al.  Imaging performance of an amorphous selenium digital mammography detector in a breast tomosynthesis system. , 2008, Medical physics.

[33]  K. Doi,et al.  Determination of subjective similarity for pairs of masses and pairs of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms: comparison of similarity ranking scores and absolute similarity ratings. , 2007, Medical physics.

[34]  S. Ciatto,et al.  Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. , 2013, The Lancet. Oncology.

[35]  Yiheng Zhang,et al.  Erratum for 72585W: The CNR method in scan angle optimization of tomosynthesis and its limitations , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[36]  U. Neitzel,et al.  Digital radiography with a large-scale electronic flat-panel detector vs screen-film radiography: observer preference in clinical skeletal diagnostics , 2001, European Radiology.

[37]  J Yorkston,et al.  Dual-energy imaging of the chest: optimization of image acquisition techniques for the 'bone-only' image. , 2008, Medical physics.

[38]  I. Sechopoulos.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part II. Image reconstruction, processing and analysis, and advanced applications. , 2013, Medical physics.

[39]  Ioannis Sechopoulos,et al.  Optimization of the acquisition geometry in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. , 2009, Medical physics.

[40]  Aldo Badano,et al.  A fast, angle-dependent, analytical model of CsI detector response for optimization of 3D x-ray breast imaging systems. , 2010, Medical physics.

[41]  Aldo Badano,et al.  Anisotropic imaging performance in breast tomosynthesis. , 2007, Medical physics.

[42]  E. Halpern,et al.  Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial. , 2013, Radiology.

[43]  A. Maidment,et al.  Optimization of phosphor-based detector design for oblique x-ray incidence in digital breast tomosynthesis. , 2011, Medical physics.

[44]  S. Glick,et al.  Evaluation of a variable dose acquisition technique for microcalcification and mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis. , 2009, Medical physics.

[45]  Bo Zhao,et al.  Optimization of Tomosynthesis Acquisition Parameters: Angular Range and Number of Projections , 2008, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

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

[47]  Tao Wu,et al.  The Dependence of Tomosynthesis Imaging Performance on the Number of Scan Projections , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.