Error Analysis of Calibration Materials on Dual-Energy Mammography

  • Xuanqin Mou
  • Xi Chen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4792)


Dual-energy mammography can suppress the contrast between adipose and glandular tissues and improve the detectability of microcalcifications (MCs). In clinical dual-energy mammography, imaging object is human breast, while in calibration measurements, only phantoms of breast-tissue-equivalent material can be used. The composition and density differences between calibration materials and human breast bring the differences of linear attenuation coefficient which lead to the calculation errors in dual-energy imaging. In this paper, the magnitude of MC thickness error from calibration materials has been analyzed using a first-order propagation of error analysis. This analysis shows that the thickness error from calibration materials ranges from dozens to thousands of microns which can not be ignored when carrying out dual-energy calculations. The evaluation of several popular phantoms shows that it is of great importance to adopt the phantom materials approaching human breast most.


dual-energy mammography calibration materials error analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Johns, P.C., Yaffe, M.J.: Theoretical Optimization of Dual-energy X-ray Imaging with Application to Mammography. Med. Phys. 13, 289–296 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kappadath, S.C., Shaw, C.C.: Dual-energy Digital Mammography for Calcification Imaging: Scatter and Nonuniformity Corrections. Med. Phys. 32, 3395–3408 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guillemaud, R., Robert-Coutant, C., Darboux, M., Gagein, J.J., Dinten, J.M.: Evaluation of Dual-energy Radiography with a Digital X-ray Detector. Proc. SPIE 4320, 469–478 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kappadath, S.C., Shaw, C.C.: Dual-energy Digital mammography: Calibration and Inverse-mapping Techniques to Estimate Calcification Thickness and Glandular-tissue Ratio. Med. Phys. 30, 1110–1117 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hammerstein, G.R., Miller, D.W., White, D.R., Masterson, M.E., Woodard, H.Q., Laughlin, J.S.: Absorbed Radiation Dose in Mammography. Radiology 130, 485–491 (1979)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fewell, T.R., Shuping, R.E.: Handbook of Mammographic X-ray Spectra. HEW Publication (FDA), Washington. DC (1978)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lemacks, M.R., Kappadath, S.C., Shaw, C.C., Liu, X., Whitman, G.: A Dual-energy Subtraction Technique for Microcalcification Imaging in Digital Mammography-A Signal-to-noise Analysis. Med. Phys. 29, 1739–1751 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    White, D.R.: The Formulation of Tissue Substitute Materials Using Basic Interaction Data. Phys. Med. Biol. 22, 889–899 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Byng, J.W., Mainprize, J.G., Yaffey, M.J.: X-ray Characterization of Breast Phantom Materials. Phys. Med. Biol. 43, 1367–1377 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xuanqin Mou
    • 1
  • Xi Chen
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Image Processing and Pattern Recognition, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, 710049China

Personalised recommendations