Image Qualities of Phase-Contrast Mammography

  • Chika Honda
  • Hiromu Ohara
  • Tomonori Gido
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4046)


A digital full-filed mammography system using phase-contrast technique has been developed. The system consists of a dedicated mammography unit, a computed radiography unit with a sampling rate of 43.75 microns, and a photothermographic printer with a printing rate of 25 microns for photothermographic film with the maximum optical density of 4.0. The sharpness of the output image is improved with an edge effect due to phase contrast and magnification. The image noise is reduced by an air-gap method with no bucky. In this paper, the image qualities of the phase-contrast mammography are described for full-filed mammography and spot-compression at 1.5x magnification.


Modulation Transfer Function Digital Mammography Compute Radiography Image Sharpness Noise Power Spectrum 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Somenkov, V.A., Tkalich, A.K., Shil’shtein, S.S.: Refraction Contrast in X-Ray Introscopy. Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys. 36, 1309–1311 (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tanaka, T., Honda, C., Matsuo, S., et al.: The First Trial of Phase Contrast Imaging for Digital Full-Field Mammography Using a Practical Molybdenum X-ray Tube. Invest. Radiol. 40, 385–396 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shaw, C.C., Lemack, M.S., Rong, J.X., et al.: Optimization MTF and DQE in magnification radiology – Theoretical analysis. In: Phys. Med. Imag. Proc.SPIE., vol. 3977, pp. 466–475 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Freedman, M.T., B-Lo, S.C., Honda, C., et al.: Phase Contrast Mammography Using Molybdenum X-Ray: Clinical Implications in Detectability Improvement. In: Yaffe, M.J., Antonuk, L.E. (eds.) Phys. Med. Imag. Proc.SPIE., vol. 5030, pp. 533–540 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ohara, H., Honda, C., Ishisaka, A., et al.: The improvement of x-ray image sharpness in x-ray phase imaging. Konica Minolta Tech. Rep. 1, 131–134 (Japanese) (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Funke, M., Breiter, N., Hermann, K.P., et al.: Storage Phosphor Direct Magnification Mammography in Comparison with Conventional Screen-Film Mammography - a Phantom Study. Br. J. Radiol. 71, 528–534 (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cowen, A.R., Launders, J.H., Jadav, M., et al.: Visibility of Microcalcifications in Computed and Screen-Film Mammography. Phys. Med. Bio. 42, 1533–1548 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yip, W.M., Pang, S.Y., Yim, W.S., et al.: ROC Curve Analysis of Lesion Detectability on Phantoms: Comparison of Digital Spot Mammography with Conventional Spot Mammography. British J. Radiol. 74, 621–628 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Higasida, Y., Moribe, N., Morita, K., et al.: Detection of Subtle Microcalcifications: Comparison of Computed Radiography and Screen-Film Mammography. Radiology 183, 483–486 (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ideguchi, T., Higashida, Y., Kawaji, Y., et al.: New CR System with Pixel Size of 50 μm for Digital Mammography: Physical Imaging Property and Detection of Subtle Microcalcifications. Radiation Medicine 22, 218–224 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Conway, B.J., Suleiman, O.H., Rueter, F., et al.: National survey of mammographic facilities in 1985, 1988, and 1992. Radiology 191, 323–330 (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kimme-Smith, C., Bassett, L.W., Gold, R.H., et al.: Increased radiation dose at mammography due to prolonged exposure, delayed processing, and increase film darkening. Radiology 178, 387–391 (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chika Honda
    • 1
  • Hiromu Ohara
    • 1
  • Tomonori Gido
    • 1
  1. 1.R&D CenterKonica Minolta M&G Inc.TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations