Advertisement

Evaluating the Effect of Dose on Reconstructed Image Quality in Digital Tomosynthesis

  • Michael P. Kempston
  • James G. Mainprize
  • Martin J. Yaffe
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4046)

Abstract

Breast tomosynthesis has the potential to improve lesion visibility and localization compared to conventional mammography. To be clinically useful, tomosynthesis must be able to achieve high image quality at acceptable radiation doses. Tomosynthesis data sets of simple low-contrast phantoms were acquired at varying dose levels. Image quality in the reconstructed volumes was analyzed by evaluating the voxel-to-voxel signal difference to noise ratio between a simulated lesion and the surrounding “tissue”. Preliminary results indicate that image quality of small lesions is limited by scatter and reconstruction artifacts. In uniform backgrounds image quality appears to be quantum-noise limited, while in more complex backgrounds the structural noise tends to dominate.

Keywords

Lesion Size Digital Mammography Structural Noise Digital Mammogram Conventional Mammography 
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.
    Dobbins III, J.T., Godfrey, D.J.: Digital x-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potentials. Phys. Med. Biol. 48, R65–R106 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wu, T., Stewart, A., Stanton, M., et al.: Tomographic mammography using a limited number of low-dose cone-beam projection images. Med. Phys. 30, 365–380 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bloomquist, A.K., Yaffe, M.J., Pisano, E.D., et al.: Quality control for digital mammography in the ACRIN DMIST trial - Part I. Med. Phys. 33, 719–736 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mueller, K., Yagel, R., Wheller, J.J.: Anti-Aliased 3D Cone-Beam Reconstruction of Low-Contrast Objects with Algebraic Methods. IEEE Trans. Med. Im. 18, 519–537 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Siewerdsen, J.H., Jaffray, D.A.: Cone-beam computed tomography with a flat-panel imager: Magnitude and effects of x-ray scatter. Med. Phys. 28, 220–231 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael P. Kempston
    • 1
  • James G. Mainprize
    • 1
  • Martin J. Yaffe
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Imaging ResearchSunnybrook Health Sciences CentreTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of Medical BiophysicsUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations