Evaluation of Various Mammography Phantoms for Image Quality Assessment in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

  • Claudia C. Brunner
  • Raymond J. Acciavatti
  • Predrag R. Bakic
  • Andrew D. A. Maidment
  • Mark B. Williams
  • Richard Kaczmarek
  • Kish Chakrabarti
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7361)

Abstract

We investigated the appropriateness of four different mammography phantoms for image quality evaluation in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT). We tested the CIRS BR3D phantom, the ACR Prototype FFDM Accreditation Phantom, the Penn anthropomorphic breast phantom and the Quart mam/digi EPQC phantom. This work discusses the advantages and shortcomings of each phantom and concludes that none of them, in their current form, can be considered to be adequate as an image quality evaluation phantom for DBT.

Keywords

Modulation Transfer Function Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Image Quality Assessment Noise Power Spectrum Image Quality Evaluation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Li, B., Saunders, R., Uppaluri, R.: Measurement of slice thickness and in-plane resolution on radiographic tomosynthesis system using modulation transfer function (MTF). In: Proc. SPIE 6142, 61425D (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bouwman, R., Visser, R., Young, K., Dance, D., Lazzari, B., van der Burght, R., Heide, P., van Engen, R.: Daily quality control for breast tomosynthesis. In: Proc. SPIE 7622, 762241 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vecchio, S., Albanese, A., Vignoli, P., Taibi, A.: A novel approach to digital breast tomosynthesis for simultaneous acquisition of 2D and 3D images. European Radiology 21, 1207–1213 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feng, S.S.J., Sechopoulos, I.: A software-based x-ray scatter correction method for breast tomosynthesis. Medical Physics 38, 6643–6653 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carton, A.K., Bakic, P., Ullberg, C., Derand, H., Maidment, A.D.A.: Development of a physical 3D anthropomorphic breast phantom. Medical Physics 38, 891–896 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carton, A.K., Bakic, P., Ullberg, C., Maidment, A.D.A.: Development of a 3D high-resolution physical anthropomorphic breast phantom. In: Proc. SPIE 7622, 762206–1 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bakic, P.R., Zhang, C., Maidment, A.D.A.: Development and characterization of an anthropomorphic breast software phantom based upon region-growing algorithm. Medical Physics 38, 3165–3176 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de las Heras, H., Peng, R., Zeng, R., Freed, M., O´Bryan, E., Jennings, R.J.: A versatile laboratory platform for studying x-ray 3D breast imaging. In: Proceedings of IEEE Medical Imaging Conference MIC12.M-17 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    de las Heras, H., Schöfer, F., Tiller, B., del Río, M.C., Zwettler, G., Semturs, F.: A new method for dosimetry and image quality assurance in mammography and breast tomosynthesis. In: Proc. IRPA (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perry, N., Broeders, M., de Wolf, C., Törnberg, S., Holland, R., von Karsa, L.: European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis - 4th (edn.) Technical report, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Richard, S., Samei, E.: Quantitative breast tomosynthesis: From detectability to estimability. Medical Physics 37, 6157–6165 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Richard, S., Samei, E.: Quantitative imaging in breast tomosynthesis and CT: Comparison of detection and estimation task performance. Medical Physics 37, 2627–2637 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    IEC: 62220-1-2:2007 Medical electrical equipment - Characteristics of digital X-ray imaging devices - Part 1-2: Determination of the detective quantum efficiency - Detectors used in mammography. Technical report, International Electrotechnical Commission (2007) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia C. Brunner
    • 1
  • Raymond J. Acciavatti
    • 2
  • Predrag R. Bakic
    • 2
  • Andrew D. A. Maidment
    • 2
  • Mark B. Williams
    • 3
  • Richard Kaczmarek
    • 1
  • Kish Chakrabarti
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug AdministrationSilver SpringUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Radiology and Medical ImagingUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations