Development of an automated detection algorithm for patient motion blur in digital mammograms

The purpose is to develop and validate an automated method for detecting image unsharpness caused by patient motion blur in digital mammograms. The goal is that such a tool would facilitate immediate re-taking of blurred images, which has the potential to reduce the number of recalled examinations, and to ensure that sharp, high-quality mammograms are presented for reading. To meet this goal, an automated method was developed based on interpretation of the normalized image Wiener Spectrum. A preliminary algorithm was developed using 25 cases acquired using a single vendor system, read by two expert readers identifying the presence of blur, location, and severity. A predictive blur severity score was established using multivariate modeling, which had an adjusted coefficient of determination, R2 =0.63±0.02, for linear regression against the average reader-scored blur severity. A heatmap of the relative blur magnitude showed good correspondence with reader sketches of blur location, with a Spearman rank correlation of 0.70 between the algorithmestimated area fraction with blur and the maximum of the blur area fraction categories of the two readers. Given these promising results, the algorithm-estimated blur severity score and heatmap are proposed to be used to aid observer interpretation. The use of this automated blur analysis approach, ideally with feedback during an exam, could lead to a reduction in repeat appointments for technical reasons, saving time, cost, potential anxiety, and improving image quality for accurate diagnosis.

[1]  Katy Szczepura,et al.  Blurred digital mammography images , 2012 .

[2]  Ann-Katherine Carton,et al.  Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part II. Dual-energy imaging. , 2013, Medical physics.

[3]  P Hogg,et al.  What is the minimum amount of simulated breast movement required for visual detection of blurring? An exploratory investigation. , 2015, The British journal of radiology.

[4]  Peter Hogg,et al.  Comparative analysis of visual blurring detection in mammography images - clinical room monitor versus reporting grade monitor: initial results , 2015 .

[5]  Sung Hun Kim,et al.  Mammographic Artifacts on Full-Field Digital Mammography , 2013, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[6]  Martin J Yaffe,et al.  The relationship between anatomic noise and volumetric breast density for digital mammography. , 2012, Medical physics.

[7]  Ingrid Reiser,et al.  Comparison of power spectra for tomosynthesis projections and reconstructed images. , 2009, Medical physics.

[8]  Francis R. Verdun,et al.  Detectability of radiological images: the influence of anatomical noise , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[9]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Does image quality matter? Impact of resolution and noise on mammographic task performance. , 2007, Medical physics.

[10]  Ralph Highnam,et al.  Validation of noise estimation for a clinical contrast-to-noise ratio for digital mammographic imaging , 2018, Medical Imaging.

[11]  Philip F. Judy,et al.  Detection of lesions in mammographic structure , 1999, Medical Imaging.