Investigation of test methods for QC in dual-energy based contrast-enhanced digital mammography systems: II. Artefacts/uniformity, exposure time and phantom-based dosimetry

被引:2
作者
Marshall, N. W. [1 ,2 ]
Cockmartin, L. [1 ]
Bosmans, H. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Gasthuisberg, Dept Radiol, Herestr 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[2] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Med Imaging Res Ctr, Med Phys & Qual Assessment, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
关键词
dual energy imaging; contrast-enhanced digital mammography; phantoms; quality control; SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; ARTIFACTS; CONVERSION; IMAGES; NOISE; UK;
D O I
10.1088/1361-6560/ad027f
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Part II of this study describes constancy tests for artefacts and image uniformity, exposure time, and phantom-based dosimetry; these are applied to four mammography systems equipped with contrast enhanced mammography (CEM) capability. Artefacts were tested using a breast phantom that simulated breast shape and thickness change at the breast edge. Image uniformity was assessed using rectangular poly(methyl)methacrylate PMMA plates at phantom thicknesses of 20, 40 and 60 mm, for the low energy (LE), high energy (HE) images and the recombined CEM image. Uniformity of signal and of the signal to noise ratio was quantified. To estimate CEM exposure times, breast simulating blocks were imaged in automatic exposure mode. The resulting x-ray technique factors were then set manually and exposure time for LE and HE images and total CEM acquisition time was measured with a multimeter. Mean glandular dose (MGD) was assessed as a function of simulated breast thickness using three different phantom compositions: (i) glandular and adipose breast tissue simulating blocks combined to give glandularity values that were typical of those in a screening population, as thickness was changed (ii) PMMA sheets combined with polyethylene blocks (iii) PMMA sheets with spacers. Image uniformity was superior for LE compared to HE images. Two systems did not generate recombined images for the uniformity test when the detector was fully covered. Acquisition time for a CEM image pair for a 60 mm thick breast equivalent phantom ranged from 3.4 to 10.3 s. Phantom composition did not have a strong influence on MGD, with differences generally smaller than 10%. MGD for the HE images was lower than for the LE images, by a factor of between 1.3 and 4.0, depending on system and simulated breast thickness. When combined with the iodine signal assessment in part I, these tests provide a comprehensive assessment of CEM system imaging performance.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [1] Investigation of single-shot beam quality measurements using state of the art solid-state dosimeters for routine quality assurance applications in mammography
    Bemelmans, Frederic
    Marshall, Nicholas W.
    Dedulle, An
    Wigati, Kristina Tri
    Ivanovic, Sonja
    Binst, Joke
    Struelens, Lara
    De Hauwere, An
    Devillers, Magali
    Bosmans, Hilde
    [J]. PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 88 : 242 - 249
  • [2] Berg W., 2021, No Screening Contrast-Enhanced Mammography as an Alternative to MRI (SCEMAM) NCT04764292
  • [3] Contrast-enhanced Spectral Mammography: Modality-Specific Artifacts and Other Factors Which May Interfere with Image Quality
    Bhimani, Chandni
    Li, Luna
    Liao, Lydia
    Roth, Robyn G.
    Tinney, Elizabeth
    Germaine, Pauline
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2017, 24 (01) : 89 - 94
  • [4] Average glandular dose in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of phantom and patient data
    Bouwman, R. W.
    van Engen, R. E.
    Young, K. C.
    den Heeten, G. J.
    Broeders, M. J. M.
    Schopphoven, S.
    Jeukens, C. R. L. P. N.
    Veldkamp, W. J. H.
    Dance, D. R.
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2015, 60 (20) : 7893 - 7907
  • [5] Dose assessment in contrast enhanced digital mammography using simple phantoms simulating standard model breasts
    Bouwman, R. W.
    van Engen, R. E.
    Young, K. C.
    Veldkamp, W. J. H.
    Dance, D. R.
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2015, 60 (01) : N1 - N7
  • [6] Phantoms for quality control procedures in digital breast tomosynthesis: dose assessment
    Bouwman, R. W.
    Diaz, O.
    van Engen, R. E.
    Young, K. C.
    den Heeten, G. J.
    Broeders, M. J. M.
    Veldkamp, W. J. H.
    Dance, D. R.
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2013, 58 (13) : 4423 - 4438
  • [7] Contrast-enhanced mammography in breast cancer screening
    Coffey, Kristen
    Jochelson, Maxine S.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 156
  • [8] Estimation of mean glandular dose for contrast enhanced digital mammography: factors for use with the UK, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols
    Dance, D. R.
    Young, K. C.
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2014, 59 (09) : 2127 - 2137
  • [9] Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol
    Dance, DR
    Skinner, CL
    Young, KC
    Beckett, JR
    Kotre, CJ
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2000, 45 (11) : 3225 - 3240
  • [10] Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography with a photon-counting detector
    Fredenberg, Erik
    Hemmendorff, Magnus
    Cederstrom, Bjorn
    Aslund, Magnus
    Danielsson, Mats
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (05) : 2017 - 2029