Dose evaluation of simultaneous breast radiography and mechanical imaging

This study investigates the impact in terms of radiation dose when performing simultaneous digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and mechanical imaging (MI) – DBTMI. DBTMI has demonstrated the potential to increase specificity of cancer detection, and reduce unnecessary biopsies, as compared to digital mammography (DM) screening. The presence of the MI sensor during simultaneous image acquisition may increase the radiation dose when automatic exposure control is used. In this project, a radiation dose study was conducted on clinically available breast imaging systems with and without the MI sensor. We have investigated three approaches to analyse the dose increase in DBTMI, using (i) the estimates of average glandular dose (AGD) reported in DICOM headers of radiography images; (ii) AGD measured by a conventional dosemeter; and (iii) AGD measured by optically stimulated luminescence using NaCl pellets. The relative increase in AGD estimated from DICOM headers when using the MI sensor was on average 10.7% and 12.4%, for DM and DBT measurements, respectively. The relative increase in AGD using the conventional dosemeter was 11.2% in DM mode and 12.2% in DBT mode. The relative increase in AGD using NaCl pellets was 14.6% in DM mode. Our measurements suggest that the use of simultaneous breast radiography and MI increases the AGD by 13% on average. The increase in dose is still below the acceptable values in mammography screening recommended by the European Guidelines.

[1]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Assessment of video frame interpolation network to generate digital breast tomosynthesis projections , 2022, The International Workshop on Breast Imaging.

[2]  S. Zackrisson,et al.  Development and evaluation of a method for tumor growth simulation in virtual clinical trials of breast cancer screening , 2022, Journal of medical imaging.

[3]  S. Zackrisson,et al.  Finite element model of mechanical imaging of the breast , 2022, Journal of medical imaging.

[4]  S. Zackrisson,et al.  Virtual clinical trial of simultaneous digital breast tomosynthesis and mechanical imaging: model calibration and the effect of tumor depth , 2022, Medical Imaging.

[5]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  VIRTUAL CLINICAL TRIALS IN MEDICAL IMAGING SYSTEM EVALUATION AND OPTIMISATION , 2021, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[6]  Y. Hinrichsen,et al.  Experimentally determined and Monte Carlo–calculated energy dependence of NaCl pellets read by optically stimulated luminescence for photon beams in the energy range 30 keV to 1.25 MeV , 2020, Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection.

[7]  E. Conant,et al.  Five Consecutive Years of Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Outcomes by Screening Year and Round. , 2020, Radiology.

[8]  C. Bernhardsson,et al.  Physical and dosimetric properties of NaCl pellets made in-house for the use in prospective optically stimulated luminescence dosimetry applications , 2018, Radiation Measurements.

[9]  Petra Macaskill,et al.  Breast Cancer Screening Using Tomosynthesis or Mammography: A Meta-analysis of Cancer Detection and Recall , 2018, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[10]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Can mechanical imaging increase the specificity of mammography screening? , 2017, European Radiology.

[11]  A. Rosso,et al.  False positives in breast cancer screening with one-view breast tomosynthesis: An analysis of findings leading to recall, work-up and biopsy rates in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial , 2016, European Radiology.

[12]  D R Dance,et al.  Average glandular dose in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of phantom and patient data , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Pressure distribution in mammography: compression of breasts with malignant tumor masses , 2013, Medical Imaging.

[14]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Breast compression in mammography: pressure distribution patterns , 2012, Acta radiologica.

[15]  D. Dance,et al.  Estimation of mean glandular dose for breast tomosynthesis: factors for use with the UK, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.