A comparison of lesion detection accuracy using digital mammography and flat-panel CT breast imaging (Honorable Mention Poster Award)

Although conventional mammography is currently the best modality to detect early breast cancer, it is limited in that the recorded image represents the superposition of a 3D object onto a 2D plane. As an alternative, cone-beam CT breast imaging with a CsI based flat-panel imager (CTBI) has been proposed with the ability to provide 3D visualization of breast tissue. To investigate possible improvements in lesion detection accuracy using CTBI over digital mammography (DM), a computer simulation study was conducted using simulated lesions embedded into a structured 3D breast model. The computer simulation realistically modeled x-ray transport through a breast model, as well as the signal and noise propagation through the flat-panel imager. Polyenergetic x-ray spectra of W/Al 50 kVp for CTBI and Mo/Mo 28 kVp for DM were modeled. For the CTBI simulation, the intensity of the x-ray spectra for each projection view was determined so as to provide a total mean glandular dose (MGD) of 4 mGy, which is approximately equivalent to that given in a conventional two-view screening mammography study. Since only one DM view was investigated here, the intensity of the DM x-ray spectra was defined to give 2 mGy MGD. Irregular lesions were simulated by using a stochastic growth algorithm providing lesions with an effective diameter of 5 mm. Breast tissue was simulated by generating an ensemble of backgrounds with a power law spectrum. To evaluate lesion detection accuracy, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) study was performed with 4 observers reading an ensemble of images for each case. The average area under the ROC curves (Az) was 0.94 for CTBI, and 0.81 for DM. Results indicate that a 5 mm lesion embedded in a structured breast phantom can be detected by CT breast imaging with statistically significant higher confidence than with digital mammography.

[1]  J. H. Gallagher,et al.  Computed tomographic evaluation of the breast. , 1978, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  Stephen J. Glick,et al.  Using LROC analysis to evaluate detection accuracy of microcalcification clusters imaged with flat-panel CT mammography , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[3]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Mammogram synthesis using a 3D simulation. I. Breast tissue model and image acquisition simulation. , 2002, Medical physics.

[4]  Aruna A. Vedula,et al.  Microcalcification detection using cone-beam CT mammography with a flat-panel imager. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Srinivasan Vedantham Design and Characterization of a High-resolution Cardiovascular Imager , 2002 .

[6]  J. H. Hubbell,et al.  Tables of X-Ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass Energy-Absorption Coefficients 1 keV to 20 MeV for Elements Z = 1 to 92 and 48 Additional Substances of Dosimetric Interest , 1995 .

[7]  Huiguang He,et al.  Preliminary system characterization of flat-panel-detector-based cone-beam CT for breast imaging , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[8]  H H Barrett,et al.  Effect of random background inhomogeneity on observer detection performance. , 1992, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[9]  Arthur E. Burgess,et al.  Mammographic structure: data preparation and spatial statistics analysis , 1999, Medical Imaging.

[10]  P. C. Johns,et al.  X-ray characterisation of normal and neoplastic breast tissues. , 1987, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  A. Burgess,et al.  Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise. , 2001, Medical physics.

[12]  T. R. Fewell,et al.  Molybdenum, rhodium, and tungsten anode spectral models using interpolating polynomials with application to mammography. , 1997, Medical physics.

[13]  L. Feldkamp,et al.  Practical cone-beam algorithm , 1984 .

[14]  J Yorkston,et al.  Empirical and theoretical investigation of the noise performance of indirect detection, active matrix flat-panel imagers (AMFPIs) for diagnostic radiology. , 1997, Medical physics.

[15]  C. Metz ROC Methodology in Radiologic Imaging , 1986, Investigative radiology.

[16]  Stephen J Glick,et al.  Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for flat-panel CT breast imaging , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[17]  J. Boone,et al.  Dedicated breast CT: radiation dose and image quality evaluation. , 2001, Radiology.

[18]  Biao Chen,et al.  Cone-beam volume CT breast imaging: feasibility study. , 2002, Medical physics.

[19]  Srinivasan Vedantham,et al.  Investigation of optimal kVp settings for CT mammography using a flat-panel imager , 2002, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[20]  C Abbey,et al.  Statistical texture synthesis of mammographic images with super-blob lumpy backgrounds. , 1999, Optics express.

[21]  Stephen J. Glick,et al.  Characterization of scatter radiation in cone beam CT mammography , 2005, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[22]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Megalopinakophobia: its symptoms and cures , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[23]  J. Boone,et al.  An accurate method for computer-generating tungsten anode x-ray spectra from 30 to 140 kV. , 1997, Medical physics.

[24]  A. Mushlin,et al.  Estimating the accuracy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. , 1998, American journal of preventive medicine.

[25]  J H Siewerdsen,et al.  Strategies to improve the signal and noise performance of active matrix, flat-panel imagers for diagnostic x-ray applications. , 2000, Medical physics.