The effect of system geometry and dose on the threshold detectable calcification diameter in 2D-mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is under consideration to replace or to be used in combination with 2D-mammography in breast screening. The aim of this study was the comparison of the detection of microcalcification clusters by human observers in simulated breast images using 2D-mammography, narrow angle (15°/15 projections) and wide angle (50°/25 projections) DBT. The effects of the cluster height in the breast and the dose to the breast on calcification detection were also tested. Simulated images of 6 cm thick compressed breasts were produced with and without microcalcification clusters inserted, using a set of image modelling tools for 2D-mammography and DBT. Image processing and reconstruction were performed using commercial software. A series of 4-alternative forced choice (4AFC) experiments was conducted for signal detection with the microcalcification clusters as targets. Threshold detectable calcification diameter was found for each imaging modality with standard dose: 2D-mammography: 2D-mammography (165  ±  9 µm), narrow angle DBT (211  ±  11 µm) and wide angle DBT (257  ±  14 µm). Statistically significant differences were found when using different doses, but different geometries had a greater effect. No differences were found between the threshold detectable calcification diameters at different heights in the breast. Calcification clusters may have a lower detectability using DBT than 2D imaging.

[1]  J. S. Laughlin,et al.  Absorbed radiation dose in mammography. , 1979, Radiology.

[2]  Dev P Chakraborty,et al.  The relationship between cancer detection in mammography and image quality measurements. , 2016, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[3]  H Bosmans,et al.  Measurements of system sharpness for two digital breast tomosynthesis systems , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[4]  D. DeLong,et al.  Digital mammography: effects of reduced radiation dose on diagnostic performance. , 2007, Radiology.

[5]  I. Sechopoulos.  A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part II. Image reconstruction, processing and analysis, and advanced applications. , 2013, Medical physics.

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

[7]  Kenneth C. Young,et al.  Characterisation of Screen Detected and Simulated Calcification Clusters in Digital Mammograms , 2014, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[8]  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.

[9]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Monte Carlo simulation of breast tomosynthesis: visibility of microcalcifications at different acquisition schemes , 2015, Medical Imaging.

[10]  Bo Zhao,et al.  Image artifacts in digital breast tomosynthesis: investigation of the effects of system geometry and reconstruction parameters using a linear system approach. , 2008, Medical physics.

[11]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Detection of calcification clusters in digital breast tomosynthesis slices at different dose levels utilizing a SRSAR reconstruction and JAFROC , 2015, Medical Imaging.

[12]  D R Dance,et al.  Comparison of the x-ray attenuation properties of breast calcifications, aluminium, hydroxyapatite and calcium oxalate , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  Stephen J. Glick,et al.  Rapid Generation of Structured Physical Phantoms for Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis , 2016, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[14]  K Bliznakova,et al.  A three-dimensional breast software phantom for mammography simulation. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  James A. Scott.  Photon, Electron, Proton and Neutron Interaction Data for Body Tissues ICRU Report 46. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Bethesda, 1992, $40.00 , 1993 .

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

[17]  Michael P. Kempston,et al.  Resolution at oblique incidence angles of a flat panel imager for breast tomosynthesis. , 2006, Medical physics.

[18]  David Gur,et al.  Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  R M Nishikawa,et al.  Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise. , 2010, Medical physics.

[20]  D R Dance,et al.  Average glandular dose in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of phantom and patient data , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

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

[22]  Hilde Bosmans,et al.  Characterisation of a breast tomosynthesis unit to simulate images , 2013, Medical Imaging.

[23]  Kenneth C. Young,et al.  Automated and Human Determination of Threshold Contrast for Digital Mammography Systems , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[24]  Sara Gavenonis,et al.  Calcifications in the Breast and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis , 2011, The breast journal.

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

[26]  Michael Sandborg,et al.  Implementation of pathologies in the Monte Carlo model in chest and breast imaging , 2003 .

[27]  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.

[28]  Hilde Bosmans,et al.  Development and validation of a modelling framework for simulating 2D-mammography and breast tomosynthesis images , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[29]  Christian G. Graff,et al.  A new, open-source, multi-modality digital breast phantom , 2016, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[30]  D. Dance,et al.  Estimation of mean glandular dose for breast tomosynthesis: factors for use with the UK, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[31]  E. Halpern,et al.  Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial. , 2013, Radiology.

[32]  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.

[33]  Kenneth C. Young,et al.  OPTIMAM Image Simulation Toolbox - Recent Developments and Ongoing Studies , 2016, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[34]  C. J. Kotre,et al.  Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[35]  Oliver Diaz,et al.  Image simulation and a model of noise power spectra across a range of mammographic beam qualities. , 2014, Medical physics.

[36]  Kenneth C. Young,et al.  Generation of 3D synthetic breast tissue , 2016, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[37]  A E Burgess,et al.  The Rose model, revisited. , 1999, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[38]  Otto Zhou,et al.  Dependency of image quality on system configuration parameters in a stationary digital breast tomosynthesis system. , 2013, Medical physics.

[39]  Hilde Bosmans,et al.  Investigation of the effect of tube motion in breast tomosynthesis: continuous or step and shoot? , 2011, Medical Imaging.

[40]  R. Siddon.  Fast calculation of the exact radiological path for a three-dimensional CT array. , 1985, Medical physics.

[41]  Ann-Katherine Carton,et al.  A Novel 3D Stochastic Solid Breast Texture Model for X-Ray Breast Imaging , 2016, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[42]  Hilde Bosmans,et al.  Performance comparison of breast imaging modalities using a 4AFC human observer study , 2015, Medical Imaging.

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

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

[45]  Ioannis Sechopoulos,et al.  Optimization of the acquisition geometry in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. , 2009, Medical physics.

[46]  A. Burgess.  Comparison of receiver operating characteristic and forced choice observer performance measurement methods. , 1995, Medical physics.