Dual-energy imaging in full-field digital mammography: a phantom study

Taibi, Angelo; Fabbri, S.; Baldelli, Paola; Maggio, C. Di; Gennaro, Gisella; Marziani, M.; Tuffanelli, A.; Gambaccini, M.

doi:10.1088/0031-9155/48/13/307

Cited by 47 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1985, Johns et al [4] , using a scanned projection radiography system and a phantom containing breast tissue samples, have shown that DE could increase the detectability of calcium deposits. More recent studies have been performed with commercial digital units.…”

Section: A Study On Dual-energy Subtraction In Digital Mammographymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study on Dual-Energy Subtraction in Digital Mammography

Brandan¹,

Ruiz‐Trejo²,

Márquez³

et al. 2004

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: A Study On Dual-energy Subtraction In Digital Mammographymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study on Dual-Energy Subtraction in Digital Mammography

Brandan¹,

Ruiz‐Trejo²,

Márquez³

et al. 2004

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The breast thickness estimation is limited by the assumptions required in the breast shape model and the errors associated with the paddle thickness measurement (Ducote and Molloi 2010a). Dual-energy imaging has previously been used in contrast-imaging and calcification imaging , Marziani et al 2002, Taibi et al 2003, Kappadath and Shaw 2005, Lemacks et al 2002. Recently, studies have reported the use of these techniques in the quantification of breast density and the estimation of the glandular and adipose thicknesses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantification of breast density using dual-energy mammography with liquid phantom calibration

Lam¹,

Ding²,

Molloi³

2014

Phys. Med. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast density is a widely recognized potential risk factor for breast cancer. However, accurate quantification of breast density is a challenging task in mammography. The current use of plastic breast-equivalent phantoms for calibration provides limited accuracy in dual-energy mammography due to the chemical composition of the phantom. We implemented a breast-equivalent liquid phantom for dual-energy calibration in order to improve the accuracy of breast density measurement. To design these phantoms, three liquid compounds were chosen: water, isopropyl alcohol, and glycerol. Chemical compositions of glandular and adipose tissues, obtained from NIST database, were used as reference materials. Dual-energy signal of the liquid phantom at different breast densities (0% to 100%) and thicknesses (1 to 8 cm) were simulated. Glandular and adipose tissue thicknesses were estimated from a higher order polynomial of the signals. Our results indicated that the linear attenuation coefficients of the breast-equivalent liquid phantoms match those of the target material. Comparison between measured and known breast density data shows a linear correlation with a slope close to 1 and a non-zero intercept of 7%, while plastic phantoms showed a slope of 0.6 and a non-zero intercept of 8%. Breast density results derived from the liquid calibration phantoms showed higher accuracy than those derived from the plastic phantoms for different breast thicknesses and various tube voltages. We performed experimental phantom studies using liquid phantoms and then compared the computed breast density with those obtained using a bovine tissue model. The experimental data and the known values were in good correlation with a slope close to 1 (∼1.1). In conclusion, our results indicate that liquid phantoms are a reliable alternative for calibration in dual-energy mammography and better reproduce the chemical properties of the target material.

show abstract

“…Previous dual energy mammography techniques have primarily focused on imaging calcium, [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] iodine, and neoplastic breast tissue. [26][27][28][29] The adipose and glandular tissues have effective atomic numbers of 6.33 and 6.93, respectively. 30 Dual energy mammography can exploit this effective atomic number difference to quantify glandular and adipose tissue thicknesses for breast density measurement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantification of breast density with dual energy mammography: An experimental feasibility study

Ducote

Molloi

2010

Medical Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Breast density, the percentage of glandular breast tissue, has been shown to be a strong indicator of breast cancer risk. A quantitative method to measure breast density with dual energy mammography was investigated using physical phantoms. Methods: The dual energy mammography system used a tungsten anode x-ray tube with a 50 m rhodium beam filter for low energy images and a 300 m copper beam filter for high energy images. Glandular and adipose equivalent phantoms of uniform thickness were used to calibrate a dual energy basis decomposition algorithm. Four different phantom studies were used to evaluate the technique. The first study consisted of phantoms with thicknesses of 2.5-8.5 cm in 0.5 cm steps with variable densities centered at a mean of 28%. The second study consisted of phantoms at a fixed thickness of 4.0 cm, which ranged in densities from 0% to 100% in increments of 12.5%. The third study consisted of 4.0 cm thick phantoms at densities of 25%, 50% and 75% each imaged at three areal sizes, approximately 62.5, 125, and 250 cm 2 , in order to assess the effect of breast size on density measurement. The fourth study consisted of step phantoms designed to more closely mimic the shape of a female breast with maximal thicknesses from 3.0 to 7.0 cm at a fixed density of 50%. All images were corrected for x-ray scatter. Results: The RMS errors in breast density measurements were 0.44% for the variable thickness phantoms, 0.64% for the variable density phantoms, 2.87% for the phantoms of different areal sizes, and 4.63% for step phantoms designed to closely resemble the shape of a breast. Conclusions:The results of the phantom studies indicate that dual energy mammography can be used to measure breast density with an RMS error of approximately 5%.

show abstract

Dual-energy imaging in full-field digital mammography: a phantom study

Cited by 47 publications

References 22 publications

A Study on Dual-Energy Subtraction in Digital Mammography

A Study on Dual-Energy Subtraction in Digital Mammography

Quantification of breast density using dual-energy mammography with liquid phantom calibration

Quantification of breast density with dual energy mammography: An experimental feasibility study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About