Skip to main content

Comparison of three tissue composition measurement techniques using digital mammograms — A signal-to-noise study

Journal of Digital Imaging volume 11, Article number: 137 (1998) Cite this article

Abstract

Tissue composition measurement may provide a quantitatively and physically meaningful method to objectively determine the “mammographic density” linked to breast cancer risk. A single energy hybrid (SEH) technique is described for measuring the tissue composition on a pixel-by-pixel basis with a single digital mammogram. Theoretical models were derived and used to compute signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) in tissue composition measurement using the SEH method. The results were compared with those computed for measurements using the dual kVp and dual screen methods. SNRs were theoretically related to the pixel area, total unattenuated detector exposure and fluence spectra of the incident X-rays. SNRs were computed for measurement of the adipose tissue thickness for a 6 cm thick breast, consisting of 50% of adipose tissue and 50% of glandular tissue. Effects of kVp and prepatient filtration were studied by computing the SNRs for various kVps and filters and optimal kVps and filters are determined. The results showed that the SNRs obtained with the SEH method is an order of magnitude better than the dual kVp method, which, in turn, is an order of magnitude better than the dual screen method. When using the optimal kVp’s and no prepatient filtration, the SNRs were computed to be 84.2, 13.2, and 2.0 for the SEH, dual kVp, and dual screen methods, respectively. Prepatient filtration can improve the SNR by as much as 35% for the dual kVp and dual screen techniques with reasonable tube loading factors (8–10).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Shaw de Paredes E: Radiographic breast anatomy: Radiologic signs of breast cancer, in Haus AG, Yaffe MJ (eds): Syllabus: A Categorical Course in Physics-Technical Aspects of Breast Imaging (ed 3). Oak Brook, IL, RSNA, 1994, pp 35–46

    Google Scholar 

  2. Yaffe MJ, Jennings R, Fahrig R, et al: X-ray spectral considerations for mammography, in Haus AG, Yaffe MJ (eds): Syllabus: A Categorical Course in Physics-Technical Aspects of Breast Imaging (ed 3). Oak Brook, IL, RSNA, 1994, pp 63–74

    Google Scholar 

  3. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, et al: The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Phys Med Biol 39:1629–1638, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Leinster SJ, Walsh PV, Whitehouse GH, et al: Factors associated with mammographic parenchymal patterns. Clin Radiol 39:252–256, 1988

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Saftlas AF, Hoover RN, Brinton LA, et al: Mammographic parenchymal patterns as indicators of breast cancer risk. Cancer 67:2833–2838, 1991

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Warner E, Lockwood G, Tritchler D: The risk of breast cancer associated with mammographic parenchymal patterns: A meta-analysis of the published literature to examine the effect of method of classification. Cancer Detect Prev 16:67–72, 1992

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, et al: Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:1622–1629, 1995

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, et al: Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: Results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:670–675, 1995

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rowlands JA, Hunter DM, Araj N: X-ray imaging using amorphous selenium: A photoinduced discharge readout method for digital mammography. Med Phys 18:421–431, 1991

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yaffe MJ: Direct digital mammography using a scanned-slot CCD imaging system. Med Prog Technol 19:13–21, 1993

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Karellas A, Harris LJ, D’Orsi CJ: Small field digital mammography with a 2048×2048 pixel charge coupled device. Radiology 177(P):288, 1990 (abstr)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Williams MB, Liu H, Fajardo LL, et al: Imaging properties of a prototype digital detector for full-breast mammography. Radiology 197(P):291, 1995 (abstr)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shaw CC, Wang TP, Breitenstein DS, et al: A high resolution storage phosphor imaging system for mammographic imaging. Med Phys 22:997, 1995 (abstr)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Workman A, Cowen AR, Brettle DS: Physical evaluation of computed radiography as a mammographic x-ray imaging system. Brit J Radiol 67:988–996, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lehmann LA, Alvarez RE, Macovski A, et al: Generalized image combinations in dual kVp digital radiography. Med Phys 8:659–667, 1981

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gauntt DM, Barnes GT: X-ray tube potential, filtration, and detector considerations in dual-energy chest radiography. Med Phys 21:203–218, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cardinal HN, Fenster A: An accurate method for direct dual-energy calibration and decomposition. Med Phys 17:327–341, 1990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Johns PC, Drost DJ, Yaffe MJ, et al: Dual-energy mammography: Initial experimental results. Med Phys 12:297–304, 1985

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Johns PC, Yaffe MJ: Theoretical optimization of dual-energy x-ray imaging with applications to mammography. Med Phys 12:289–296, 1985

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Boone JM, Shaber GS, Tecotzky M: Dual-energy mammography: A detector analysis. Med Phys 17:665–675, 1990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Brettle DS, Cowen AR: Dual-energy digital mammography utilizing stimulated phosphor computed radiography. Phys Med Biol 39:1989–2004, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Johns PC, Beauregard RM: Incorporation of scattered radiation into dual-energy radiologic theory and application to mammography. Med Phys 21:1455–1462, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gingold EL, Hasegawa BH: Systemic bias in basismaterial decomposition applied to quantitative dual-energy x-ray imaging. Med Phys 19:25–33, 1992

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Moreau M, Holdsworth DW, Fenster A: Dual-energy x-ray imaging technique for in vitro tissue composition measurement. Med Phys 21:1807–1815, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nishitani H, Umezu Y, Kazuhisa O, et al: Dual-energy projection radiography using condeser x-ray generator and digital radiography aparatus. Radiology 161:533–535, 1986

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ishigaki T, Sadayuki S, Yoshimi H, et al: One-shot dual-energy subtraction imaging. Radiology 161:271–273, 1986

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Stewart BK, Huang HK: Single-exposure dual-energy computed radiography. Med Phys 17:866–875, 1990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Shaw CC, Gur D: Comparison of three different techniques for dual-energy subtraction imaging in digital radiography: A signal-to-noise analysis. J Digit Imaging 5:262–270, 1992

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. White DR, Martin RJ, Darlison R: Epoxy resin based tissue substitutes. Brit J Radiol 50:814–821, 1977

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nishikawa RM, Yaffe MJ: Model of the spatial-frequency-dependent DQE of phosphor screens. Med Phys 17:894–904, 1990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fewell TR, Shuping RE: Handbook of Mammographic X-ray Spectra. Rockville, MD, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1978 (DHEW Publication No. (FDA) 79-8071)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Storm E, Israel HI: Photon cross sections from 1 keV to 100 MeV for elements Z=1 to Z=100,* in Nuclear Data Tables. New York, NY, Academic, 1970, A7:565–681

    Google Scholar 

  33. Johns HE, Cunningham JR: The Physics of Radiology. Springfield, IL, Thomas, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  34. Fuji Imaging Plates ST-III and HR-III and Fuji CR Film Types 633 and 780 for Computed Radiography. Tokyo, Japan, Fuji Photo Film Co, Ltd.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Dahlgren Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, VA

    Darryl S. Breitenstein & Chris C. Shaw PhD

  2. Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, A439 Scaife Hall, 15261, Pittsburgh, PA

    Darryl S. Breitenstein & Chris C. Shaw PhD

Authors
  1. Darryl S. Breitenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chris C. Shaw PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This work was supported in part by a grant (CA 51248) from the National Cancer Institute, a grant (DAMD 17-93-J-3009) from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, a grant (DAAH 04-93-G-0299) from the Department of Defense, and a grant, “Breast Fat Measurement,” from the Pittsburgh Cancer Institute.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Breitenstein, D.S., Shaw, C.C. Comparison of three tissue composition measurement techniques using digital mammograms — A signal-to-noise study. J Digit Imaging 11, 137 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168737

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168737

Key Words

  • computed radiography (CR)
  • digital mammography
  • numerical simulation
  • optimization
  • tissue composition measurement
  • signal-to-noise ratio