Comparison of the polynomial model against explicit measurements of noise components for different mammography systems.

Given the adverse impact of image noise on the perception of important clinical details in digital mammography, routine quality control measurements should include an evaluation of noise. The European Guidelines, for example, employ a second-order polynomial fit of pixel variance as a function of detector air kerma (DAK) to decompose noise into quantum, electronic and fixed pattern (FP) components and assess the DAK range where quantum noise dominates. This work examines the robustness of the polynomial method against an explicit noise decomposition method. The two methods were applied to variance and noise power spectrum (NPS) data from six digital mammography units. Twenty homogeneously exposed images were acquired with PMMA blocks for target DAKs ranging from 6.25 to 1600 µGy. Both methods were explored for the effects of data weighting and squared fit coefficients during the curve fitting, the influence of the additional filter material (2 mm Al versus 40 mm PMMA) and noise de-trending. Finally, spatial stationarity of noise was assessed.Data weighting improved noise model fitting over large DAK ranges, especially at low detector exposures. The polynomial and explicit decompositions generally agreed for quantum and electronic noise but FP noise fraction was consistently underestimated by the polynomial method. Noise decomposition as a function of position in the image showed limited noise stationarity, especially for FP noise; thus the position of the region of interest (ROI) used for noise decomposition may influence fractional noise composition. The ROI area and position used in the Guidelines offer an acceptable estimation of noise components. While there are limitations to the polynomial model, when used with care and with appropriate data weighting, the method offers a simple and robust means of examining the detector noise components as a function of detector exposure.

[1]  I A Cunningham,et al.  Signal and noise transfer properties of photoelectric interactions in diagnostic x-ray imaging detectors. , 2006, Medical physics.

[2]  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.

[3]  M. Rabbani,et al.  Detective quantum efficiency of imaging systems with amplifying and scattering mechanisms. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[4]  John M. Boone Spectral modeling and compilation of quantum fluence in radiography and mammography , 1998, Medical Imaging.

[5]  Nico Lanconelli,et al.  Physical and psychophysical characterization of a novel clinical system for digital mammography. , 2009, Medical physics.

[6]  Kenneth C. Young,et al.  Conversion of mammographic images to appear with the noise and sharpness characteristics of a different detector and x-ray system. , 2012, Medical physics.

[7]  M J Yaffe,et al.  Model of the spatial-frequency-dependent detective quantum efficiency of phosphor screens. , 1990, Medical physics.

[8]  M. Williams,et al.  Noise power spectra of images from digital mammography detectors. , 1999, Medical physics.

[9]  E. Samei,et al.  Plate-specific gain map correction for the improvement of detective quantum efficiency in computed radiography. , 2012, Medical physics.

[10]  P. Granfors,et al.  Performance of a 41X41-cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications. , 2000, Medical physics.

[11]  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.

[12]  H Bosmans,et al.  Optimal beam quality selection in digital mammography. , 2006, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  Paul O. Scheibe,et al.  Noise Sources In Digital Fluorography , 1981, Other Conferences.

[14]  Alistair Mackenzie,et al.  Characterization of noise sources for two generations of computed radiography systems using powder and crystalline photostimulable phosphors. , 2007, Medical physics.

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

[16]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Linear response theory for detectors consisting of discrete arrays. , 2000, Medical physics.

[17]  Arthur Burgess On the noise variance of a digital mammography system. , 2004, Medical physics.

[18]  Egbert Buhr,et al.  Measurement of correlated noise in images of computed radiography systems and its influence on the detective quantum efficiency , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[19]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Measurement of the detective quantum efficiency in digital detectors consistent with the IEC 62220-1 standard: Practical considerations regarding the choice of filter material. , 2005, Medical physics.

[20]  C Schmidgunst,et al.  Calibration model of a dual gain flat panel detector for 2D and 3D x-ray imaging. , 2007, Medical physics.

[21]  Hilde Bosmans,et al.  Effect of image quality on calcification detection in digital mammography. , 2012, Medical physics.

[22]  A. Nitrosi,et al.  On site evaluation of three flat panel detectors for digital radiography. , 2003, Medical physics.

[23]  Andreas Koch,et al.  A noise decomposition method for image quality analysis of medical radiography detectors , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[24]  R Bouwman,et al.  An alternative method for noise analysis using pixel variance as part of quality control procedures on digital mammography systems. , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

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

[26]  John M Boone,et al.  An improved method for flat-field correction of flat panel x-ray detector. , 2006, Medical physics.

[27]  N W Marshall,et al.  A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[28]  Yu Cheng,et al.  Measurement of the noise power spectrum in digital x-ray detectors , 2001 .

[29]  W. Hillen,et al.  Imaging performance of a digital storage phosphor system. , 1987, Medical physics.

[30]  D. Rimkus,et al.  Quantum noise in detectors. , 1983, Medical physics.

[31]  G T Barnes,et al.  Radiographic mottle: a comprehensive theory. , 1982, Medical physics.