Image noise sensitivity of dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging

被引:1
作者
Chen, Xi [1 ]
Nishikawa, Robert M. [2 ]
Chan, Suk-tak [3 ]
Zhang, Lei [4 ]
Mou, Xuanqin [1 ]
机构
[1] Xi An Jiao Tong Univ, Inst Image Proc & Pattern Recognit, Xian 710049, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Chicago, Dept Radiol, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[3] Hong Kong Polytech Univ, Dept Hlth Technol & Informat, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[4] Hong Kong Polytech Univ, Dept Comp, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
来源
MEDICAL IMAGING 2011: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING | 2011年 / 7961卷
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
dual-energy; digital mammography; image noise; sensitivity analysis; QUANTITATIVE-EVALUATION;
D O I
10.1117/12.877932
中图分类号
TM [电工技术]; TN [电子技术、通信技术];
学科分类号
0808 ; 0809 ;
摘要
Dual-energy digital mammography (DEDM) can suppress the contrast between adipose and glandular tissues and generate dual-energy (DE) calcification signals. DE calcification signals are always influenced by many factors. Image noise is one of these factors. In this paper, the sensitivity of DE calcification signal to image noise was analyzed based on DEDM physical model. Image noise levels of two different commercially available digital mammography systems, GE Senographe Essential system and GE Senographe DS system, were measured. The mean noise was about 1.04% for Senographe Essential system, 1.42% for Senographe DS system at 28kVp/50mAs; and was 0.47% for Senographe Essential system, 0.79% for Senographe DS system at 48kVp/12.5mAs. Evaluations were performed by comparing RMS (Root-Mean-Square) of calcification signal fluctuations in background regions and CNR (Contrast-Noise-Ratio) of calcification signals in clusters when these two digital mammography systems were used. The results showed that image noise had a serious impact on DEDM calcification signals. If GE Senographe Essential system was used, calcification signal fluctuations were 200 similar to 300 mu m, and when calcification size is greater than 300 mu m, the probability of acquiring CNR >= 3 is over 50%. If noise reduction techniques are used, the calcification threshold size of CNR >= 3 can be lower.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
Berger M J., 1999, XCOM: photon cross sections database
[2]  
Chen X., 2009, P SOC PHOTO-OPT INS, V7258
[3]   BREAST-TUMORS - COMPOSITION OF MICROCALCIFICATIONS [J].
FANDOSMORERA, A ;
PRATSESTEVE, M ;
TURASOTERAS, JM ;
TRAVERIACROS, A .
RADIOLOGY, 1988, 169 (02) :325-327
[4]  
Fewell T. R., 1978, HDB MAMMOGRAPHIC XRA, P59
[5]  
HAMMERSTEIN GR, 1979, RADIOLOGY, V130, P485
[6]   Dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging: noise reduction techniques [J].
Kappadath, S. Cheenu ;
Shaw, Chris C. .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2008, 53 (19) :5421-5443
[7]   Quantitative evaluation of dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging [J].
Kappadath, SC ;
Shaw, CC .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2004, 49 (12) :2563-2576
[8]   A dual-energy subtraction technique for microcalcification imaging in digital mammography - A signal-to-noise analysis [J].
Lemacks, MR ;
Kappadath, SC ;
Shaw, CC ;
Liu, XM ;
Whitman, GJ .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2002, 29 (08) :1739-1751
[9]   The impact of calibration phantom errors on dual-energy digital mammography [J].
Mou, Xuanqin ;
Chen, Xi ;
Sun, Lijun ;
Yu, Hengyong ;
Ji, Zhen ;
Zhang, Lei .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2008, 53 (22) :6321-6336
[10]  
Mou X, 2007, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V4792, P596