Monte Carlo simulation of breast tomosynthesis: visibility of microcalcifications at different acquisition schemes

Microcalcifications are one feature of interest in mammography and breast tomosynthesis (BT). To achieve optimal conditions for detection of microcalcifications in BT imaging, different acquisition geometries should be evaluated. The purpose of this work was to investigate the influence of acquisition schemes with different angular ranges, projection distributions and dose distributions on the visibility of microcalcifications in reconstructed BT volumes. Microcalcifications were inserted randomly in a high resolution software phantom and a simulation procedure was used to model a MAMMOMAT Inspiration BT system. The simulation procedure was based on analytical ray tracing to produce primary images, Monte Carlo to simulate scatter contributions and flatfield image acquisitions to model system characteristics. Image volumes were reconstructed using the novel method super-resolution reconstruction with statistical artifact reduction (SRSAR). For comparison purposes, the volume of the standard acquisition scheme (50° angular range and uniform projection and dose distribution) was also reconstructed using standard filtered backprojection (FBP). To compare the visibility and depth resolution of the microcalcifications, signal difference to noise ratio (SDNR) and artifact spread function width (ASFW) were calculated. The acquisition schemes with very high central dose yielded significantly lower SDNR than the schemes with more uniform dose distributions. The ASFW was found to decrease (meaning an increase in depth resolution) with wider angular range. In conclusion, none of the evaluated acquisition schemes were found to yield higher SDNR or depth resolution for the simulated microcalcifications than the standard acquisition scheme.

[1]  Thomas Mertelmeier,et al.  Optimizing filtered backprojection reconstruction for a breast tomosynthesis prototype device , 2006, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[2]  H. Bosmans,et al.  The simulation of 3D microcalcification clusters in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis. , 2011, Medical physics.

[3]  Thomas Mertelmeier,et al.  Optimizing High Resolution Reconstruction in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Using Filtered Back Projection , 2014, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[4]  Heang-Ping Chan,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance of clustered microcalcification detection on breast phantom images acquired with an experimental system using variable scan angles, angular increments, and number of projection views. , 2014, Radiology.

[5]  Günter Lauritsch,et al.  Theoretical framework for filtered back projection in tomosynthesis , 1998, Medical Imaging.

[6]  Nassir Navab,et al.  Out-of-Plane Artifact Reduction in Tomosynthesis Based on Regression Modeling and Outlier Detection , 2012, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[7]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Development and characterization of an anthropomorphic breast software phantom based upon region-growing algorithm. , 2011, Medical physics.

[8]  Lubomir M. Hadjiiski,et al.  Image quality of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis: effects of projection-view distributions. , 2011, Medical physics.

[9]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Digital mammography and tomosynthesis for breast cancer diagnosis. , 2011, Expert opinion on medical diagnostics.

[10]  M Ruschin,et al.  Visibility of microcalcification clusters and masses in breast tomosynthesis image volumes and digital mammography: a 4AFC human observer study. , 2012, Medical physics.

[11]  J. Sempau,et al.  PENELOPE-2006: A Code System for Monte Carlo Simulation of Electron and Photon Transport , 2009 .

[12]  A Fandos-Morera,et al.  Breast tumors: composition of microcalcifications. , 1988, Radiology.

[13]  M Ruschin,et al.  In-plane visibility of lesions using breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography. , 2010, Medical physics.

[14]  Wei Zhao,et al.  The effect of angular dose distribution on the detection of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis. , 2011, Medical physics.

[15]  J. Sempau,et al.  A PENELOPE-based system for the automated Monte Carlo simulation of clinacs and voxelized geometries-application to far-from-axis fields. , 2011, Medical physics.

[16]  Magnus Båth,et al.  Simulation of dose reduction in tomosynthesis. , 2009, Medical physics.

[17]  D. R. White,et al.  The composition of body tissues. , 1986, The British journal of radiology.

[18]  I. Sechopoulos.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part I. The image acquisition process. , 2013, Medical physics.

[19]  S. Glick,et al.  Evaluation of a variable dose acquisition technique for microcalcification and mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis. , 2009, Medical physics.

[20]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  An anthropomorphic breast model for breast imaging simulation and optimization. , 2011, Academic radiology.

[21]  Thomas Mertelmeier,et al.  Adaptation of Image Quality Using Various Filter Setups in the Filtered Backprojection Approach for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.