Digital x-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potential

Dobbins, James T.; Godfrey, D

doi:10.1088/0031-9155/48/19/r01

Cited by 748 publications

(537 citation statements)

References 89 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

518

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As well, some improvements have been implemented in the latest GE mammographic detector that enhance the new detector for its potential use in tomosynthesis. ( 1 – 3 ) To determine how clinical FFDM is influenced by these modifications, a survey of mammographic screening carried out by the system was performed. Data from mammographic technique factors were collected and some conclusions were drawn.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of DQE dependence with beam quality on GE Essential mammography flat panel

García-Mollá

2010

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with the analysis of the behavior of objective image quality parameters for the new GE Senographe Essential FFDM system, in particular its dependence with beam quality. The detector consists of an indirect conversion a‐Si flat panel coupled to a CsI:Tl scintillator. The system under study has gone through a series of relevant modifications in flat panel with respect to the previous model (GE Senographe DS 2000). These changes in the detector modify its performance and are intended to favor advanced applications like tomosynthesis, which uses harder beam spectra and lower doses per exposure than conventional FFDM. Although our system does not have tomosynthesis implemented, we noticed that most clinical explorations were performed by automatically selecting a harder spectrum than that of typical use in FFDM (Rh/Rh 28–30 kV instead of Mo/Mo 28 kV). Since flat‐panel optimization for tomosynthesis influences the usual FFDM clinical performance, the new detector behavior needed to be investigated. Therefore, the aim of our study is evaluating the dependence of the detector performance for different beam spectra and exposure levels. In this way, we covered the clinical beam quality range (Rh/Rh 28–30 kV) and we extended the study to even harder spectra (Rh/Rh 34 kV). Detector performance is quantified by means of modulation transfer function (MTF), normalized noise power spectrum (NNPS) and detective quantum efficiency (DQE). We found that flat‐panel optimization results in slightly – but statistically significant – higher DQE values as beam quality increases, which is contrary to the expected behavior. This positive correlation between beam quality and DQE is also diametrically opposite to that of the previous model by the same manufacturer. As a direct consequence, usual FFDM takes advantage of the changes in the detector, as less exposure is needed to achieve the same DQE if harder beams are used.PACS number: 87.59.ej

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of DQE dependence with beam quality on GE Essential mammography flat panel

García-Mollá

2010

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The FBP algorithm generally yields precise 3D reconstruction images [14]. In this study, the FBP images were reconstructed by a conventional Ramp or an SL filter kernel.…”

Section: The Reconstruction Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Digital tomosynthesis (DT) combines the benefits of digital imaging [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] with the tomographic benefits of computed tomography. The DT approach can be easily implemented in conjunction with radiography at reduced radiation doses and cost.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hematoma or inflammation in the adjacent soft tissue must also be ruled out. However, artifacts greatly complicate the evaluation of these features, frequently rendering the images uninterpretable by conventional image reconstruction, even when hard convolution kernels (Ramp or Shepp-Logan (SL) filter kernel) are used such as filtered back projection (FBP) [14]. In DT, artifacts occur as very low signals along the sweep direction around the edges of highly attenuating materials such as metal prosthesis or osteosynthetic materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Reconstruction Algorithms for Decreasing the Exposure Dose During Digital Tomosynthesis for Arthroplasty: a Phantom Study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To explore the possibility of decreasing the radiation dose during digital tomosynthesis (DT) for arthroplasty, we compared the image qualities of several reconstruction algorithms, such as filtered back projection (FBP) and two iterative reconstruction (IR), methods maximum likelihood expectation maximization (MLEM) and the simultaneous iterative reconstruction technique (SIRT) under different radiation doses. The three algorithms were implemented using a DT system and experimentally evaluated by contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), artifact spread function (ASF), and power spectrum measurements on a prosthesis phantom. The CNR and ASF data were statistically analyzed by a one-way analysis of variance. The effectiveness of each technique for enhancing the visibility of the prosthesis phantom was quantified by the CNR (reference dose vs. 20 % reduced dose in FBP, P = 0.62; reference vs. 37 % reduced dose in FBP, P = 0.16; reference vs. 55 % reduced dose in FBP, P < 0.05; reference vs. 20 % reduced dose in IR, P = 0.92; reference vs. 37 % reduced dose in IR, P = 0.40; reference vs. 55 % reduced dose in IR, P < 0.05) and ASF (reference dose vs. 20 % reduced dose in FBP, P = 0.25; reference vs. 37 and 55 % reduced dose in FBP, P < 0.05; reference vs. 20 % reduced dose in IR, P = 0.16; reference vs. 37 and 55 % reduced dose in IR, P < 0.05). The power spectra under the reference and reduced doses are equivalent. In this phantom study, the radiation dose of the reference dose could be decreased by 20 % with FBP and IR for consideration of common factors.

show abstract

“…The anatomical structures on DTS are clearly viewed on focal plane in the direction of central scan angle (such as 0° or 270°), but are less clear in the other directions due to the missing projection information from the other angles. Also, the anatomical structures on DTS planes are gradually blurred as they are off the focal plane 6 , 7 . Since the anatomical structures on DTS can be clearly viewed on the focal plane, target shifts in 2D DTS plane can be determined accurately, but the shift in the third dimension was unclear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A software tool of digital tomosynthesis application for patient positioning in radiotherapy

Yan

Dai

2016

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital Tomosynthesis (DTS) is an image modality in reconstructing tomographic images from two‐dimensional kV projections covering a narrow scan angles. Comparing with conventional cone‐beam CT (CBCT), it requires less time and radiation dose in data acquisition. It is feasible to apply this technique in patient positioning in radiotherapy. To facilitate its clinical application, a software tool was developed and the reconstruction processes were accelerated by graphic processing unit (GPU). Two reconstruction and two registration processes are required for DTS application which is different from conventional CBCT application which requires one image reconstruction process and one image registration process. The reconstruction stage consists of productions of two types of DTS. One type of DTS is reconstructed from cone‐beam (CB) projections covering a narrow scan angle and is named onboard DTS (ODTS), which represents the real patient position in treatment room. Another type of DTS is reconstructed from digitally reconstructed radiography (DRR) and is named reference DTS (RDTS), which represents the ideal patient position in treatment room. Prior to the reconstruction of RDTS, The DRRs are reconstructed from planning CT using the same acquisition setting of CB projections. The registration stage consists of two matching processes between ODTS and RDTS. The target shift in lateral and longitudinal axes are obtained from the matching between ODTS and RDTS in coronal view, while the target shift in longitudinal and vertical axes are obtained from the matching between ODTS and RDTS in sagittal view. In this software, both DRR and DTS reconstruction algorithms were implemented on GPU environments for acceleration purpose. The comprehensive evaluation of this software tool was performed including geometric accuracy, image quality, registration accuracy, and reconstruction efficiency. The average correlation coefficient between DRR/DTS generated by GPU‐based algorithm and CPU‐based algorithm is 0.99. Based on the measurements of cube phantom on DTS, the geometric errors are within 0.5 mm in three axes. For both cube phantom and pelvic phantom, the registration errors are within 0.5 mm in three axes. Compared with reconstruction performance of CPU‐based algorithms, the performances of DRR and DTS reconstructions are improved by a factor of 15 to 20. A GPU‐based software tool was developed for DTS application for patient positioning of radiotherapy. The geometric and registration accuracy met the clinical requirement in patient setup of radiotherapy. The high performance of DRR and DTS reconstruction algorithms was achieved by the GPU‐based computation environments. It is a useful software tool for researcher and clinician in evaluating DTS application in patient positioning of radiotherapy.PACS number(s): 87.57.nf

show abstract

Digital x-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potential

Cited by 748 publications

References 89 publications

Study of DQE dependence with beam quality on GE Essential mammography flat panel

Study of DQE dependence with beam quality on GE Essential mammography flat panel

Comparison of Reconstruction Algorithms for Decreasing the Exposure Dose During Digital Tomosynthesis for Arthroplasty: a Phantom Study

A software tool of digital tomosynthesis application for patient positioning in radiotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About