Image quality control for digital mammographic systems: Initial experience and outlook

Roehrig, Hans; Yu, Tao; Krupiński, Elizabeth A.

doi:10.1007/bf03168128

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The contrast detail curve ͑CDC͒ which is a graphic correlation between "minimal correct reading" diameter and disk thickness. 2,6,8 CDC is a very convenient parameter to evaluate the general performance of the imaging system: The lower the curve appears on the plot the better the system's performance. The disadvantage of CDC is that it does not give a numerical expression of image quality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this paper the concept of an ideal observer 13 is used in an effort to obtain ideal CDMAM phantom scoring and applied to compare different published methodologies and parameters. 2,[4][5][6][7][8][9] In principle, the concept which has been developed can be applied to any type of Rose contrast-detail phantom. In the light of the developed concept, the application of the CDMAM phantom for evaluation of the digital mammography system is considered.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contrast‐detail phantom scoring methodology

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Published results of medical imaging studies which make use of contrast detail mammography (CDMAM) phantom images for analysis are difficult to compare since data are often not analyzed in the same way. In order to address this situation, the concept of ideal contrast detail curves is suggested. The ideal contrast detail curves are constructed based on the requirement of having the same product of the diameter and contrast (disk thickness) of the minimal correctly determined object for every row of the CDMAM phantom image. A correlation and comparison of five different quality parameters of the CDMAM phantom image determined for obtained ideal contrast detail curves is performed. The image quality parameters compared include: (1) contrast detail curve--a graph correlation between "minimal correct reading" diameter and disk thickness; (2) correct observation ratio--the ratio of the number of correctly identified objects to the actual total number of objects multiplied by 100; (3) image quality figure--the sum of the product of the diameter of the smallest scored object and its relative contrast; (4) figure-of-merit--the zero disk diameter value obtained from extrapolation of the contrast detail curve to the origin (e.g., zero disk diameter); and (5) k-factor--the product of the thickness and the diameter of the smallest correctly identified disks. The analysis carried out showed the existence of a nonlinear relationship between the above parameters, which means that use of different parameters of CDMAM image quality potentially can cause different conclusions about changes in image quality. Construction of the ideal contrast detail curves for CDMAM phantom is an attempt to determine the quantitative limits of the CDMAM phantom as employed for image quality evaluation. These limits are determined by the relationship between certain parameters of a digital mammography system and the set of the gold disks sizes in the CDMAM phantom. Recommendations are made on selections of CDMAM phantom regions which should be used for scoring at different image quality and which scoring methodology may be most appropriate. Special attention is also paid to the use of the CDMAM phantom for image quality assessment of digital mammography systems particularly in the vicinity of the Nyquist frequency.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrast‐detail phantom scoring methodology

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The physical aspects of mammography have been the subject of many investigations which have addressed basic imaging characteristics such as x-ray scatter, [1][2][3][4] x-ray tube focal spot effects, 5 and x-ray spectra. 6,7 This knowledge has served as the basis for many technical improvements and regulatory standards of performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon‐based flat panel detector: Physical characteristics of a clinical prototype

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The physical characteristics of a clinical prototype amorphous silicon-based flat panel imager for full-breast digital mammography have been investigated. The imager employs a thin thallium doped CsI scintillator on an amorphous silicon matrix of detector elements with a pixel pitch of 100 microm. Objective criteria such as modulation transfer function (MTF), noise power spectrum, detective quantum efficiency (DQE), and noise equivalent quanta were employed for this evaluation. The presampling MTF was found to be 0.73, 0.42, and 0.28 at 2, 4, and 5 cycles/mm, respectively. The measured DQE of the current prototype utilizing a 28 kVp, Mo-Mo spectrum beam hardened with 4.5 cm Lucite is approximately 55% at close to zero spatial frequency at an exposure of 32.8 mR, and decreases to approximately 40% at a low exposure of 1.3 mR. Detector element nonuniformity and electronic gain variations were not significant after appropriate calibration and software corrections. The response of the imager was linear and did not exhibit signal saturation under tested exposure conditions.

show abstract

“…Modifications and additional tests, however, will be necessary. 22 The extent of these modifications and tests, as well as changes in the assignments of the technologists and the medical physicists, are unclear. New quality control tests may include signal uniformity of the acquisition system, CRT display evaluation, and evaluation of digital image processing tools, of archiving systems, and of detectors' electronics.…”

Section: Analog Vs Digital Mammography: Quality Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Mammography: from Theory to Practice

Kallergi

1998

Cancer Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Components Analog Digital X-ray tube (target) Molybdenum or rhodium Molybdenum or rhodium or tungsten Grid stationary or moving optional Exposure time 2 -3 sec 1 -6 sec Average dose per view less than 3.0 mGy comparable to analog or less Detector type screen-film cassette solid-state device (linear or 2D) Detector size 18 x 24 cm or 24 x 30 cm 18 x 23 cm or 19 x 25 cm Spatial resolution 15 -20 lp/mm (33 -25 µm) 5 -13 lp/mm (100 -40 µm) Image contrast resolution approximately 0.04 comparable to analog or better Dynamic range (latitude) 25 -100 5,000 -10,000 Noise quantum and film granularity quantum and electronic Image development wet processing wet or dry laser printers or digital Image display light box CRT and/or light box Image processing film processing CAD/post-processing Components and Characteristics of Analog and Digital Mammography Systems From Yaffe MJ, 8 Cheung L, 9 and Williams MB. 10

show abstract

Image quality control for digital mammographic systems: Initial experience and outlook

Cited by 14 publications

References 25 publications

Contrast‐detail phantom scoring methodology

Contrast‐detail phantom scoring methodology

Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon‐based flat panel detector: Physical characteristics of a clinical prototype

Digital Mammography: from Theory to Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About