Performance characterization of computed radiography based mammography systems

Computed Radiography (CR) is a cost-effective technology for digital mammography. In order to optimize the quality of images obtained using CR Mammography, we characterized the effect on image quality of the electrooptical components of the CR imaging chain. The metrics used to assess the image quality included the Contrast to Noise Ratio (CNR), Modulation Transfer Function (MTF), Noise Power Spectrum (NPS), Detective Quantum Efficiency (DQE) and Contrast Detail Response Phantom (CDMAM 3.4 Artinis Medical Systems). An 18×24 cm high-resolution granular phosphor imaging plate (AGFA MM3.0) was used to acquire the images. Contrast detail was measured using a GUI developed for the CDMAM phantom that was scored by independent observers. The range of theoretically acceptable values measured for the CR laser was (5-36) mW and voltage range for PMT's was (4-8) V. The light detection amplifier was investigated, and the optimal Laser Power and PMT gain used for scanning was measured. The tools that we used (CNR, MTF, NPS, DQE and Contrast-detail phantom) provided an effective means of selecting optimal values for the electro-optical components of the system. The procedure enabled us to obtain good quality CR mammograms that have less noise and improved contrast.

[1]  Ann-Katherine Carton,et al.  Validation of MTF measurement for digital mammography quality control. , 2005, Medical physics.

[2]  E. Samei,et al.  Experimental comparison of noise and resolution for 2k and 4k storage phosphor radiography systems. , 1999, Medical physics.

[3]  CJ Martin,et al.  The importance of radiation quality for optimisation in radiology , 2007, Biomedical imaging and intervention journal.

[4]  Daniel J. Valentino,et al.  Practical evaluation of image quality in computed radiographic (CR) imaging systems , 2010, Medical Imaging.

[5]  Kenneth A Fetterly,et al.  Performance evaluation of a "dual-side read" dedicated mammography computed radiography system. , 2003, Medical physics.

[6]  Hyo-Min Cho,et al.  Comparison of the Image Noise Power Spectra for Computed Radiography , 2009 .

[7]  J. Rowlands,et al.  The physics of computed radiography. , 2002, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  Christoph Hoeschen,et al.  Measurement of the detective quantum efficiency (DQE) of digital x-ray imaging devices according to the standard IEC 62220-1 , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[9]  F R Verdun,et al.  A comparison of the performance of digital mammography systems. , 2007, Medical physics.

[10]  J A Seibert,et al.  Cassette-based Digital Mammography , 2004, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[11]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Physical measures of image quality in photostimulable phosphor radiographic systems , 1997, Medical Imaging.

[12]  A Workman,et al.  A comparison of the imaging properties of CCD-based devices used for small field digital mammography. , 2002, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  Hilde Bosmans,et al.  Evaluation of software for reading images of the CDMAM test object to assess digital mammography systems , 2008, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[14]  Ulrich Neitzel,et al.  Simple method for modulation transfer function determination of digital imaging detectors from edge images , 2003, SPIE Medical Imaging.