Results of an automatic evaluation of test images according to PAS 1054 and IEC 6220-1-2 on different types of digital mammographic units;Ergebnisse einer automatischen Auswertung von Prüfkörperaufnahmen nach PAS 1054 und IEC 62220-1-2 an unterschiedlichen Typen digitaler Mammografie-Röntgeneinrichtungen

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Rontgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 181, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 979-988

  Blendl, C ^a   Schreiber, A C ^a   Buhr, H ^a  

^a Campus Deutz   (Germany)

Author keywords

Acceptance and constancy test; CDMAM test; Image processing; Image quality; Mammography; PAS 1054

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VISION TEST; ALGORITHM; ARTIFACT; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MAMMOGRAPHY; RADIATION RESPONSE; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOMETRY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFACTS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, RADIATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAMMOGRAPHY; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOMETRY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 70349906838     PISSN: 14389029     EISSN: 14389010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1109611     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Blendl C, Herman KP, Mertelmeier T. PAS 1054: Anforderungen und Prüfverfahren für digitale Mammographie-Einrichtungen. Berlin: Beuth-Verlag, 2005
2. EPQC, European protocol for the quality control of the physical and technical aspects of mammography screening. Addendum Digital Mammography (ADM), Forth Edition, European commission, 2006
3. ICRU Report 54: Medical Imaging - The Assessment of Image Quality, Bethesda (USA), 1996
4. IEC 62220-1-2, Medical electrical equipment - Characteristics of digital X-ray imaging devices - Part 1 : Determination of the detective quantum efficiency - Section 2: Mammography detectors. 2007
5. Dance DR et al. Monte Carlo calculation of conversion factors for the the estimation of mean glandular breast dose. Phys Med Biol 1990; 35: 1211-1219
6. ImageJ http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/ (Zugriff in 2007)
7. Bankmann IN. Handbook of Medical Imaging - Processing and Analysis. San Diego: Academic Press, 2000
8. Lenzen H. Gerätetechnische Qualitätssicherung im digitalen Mammographie-Screening in Deutschland aus Sicht der Referenzzentren, BMU: Internationaler Erfahrungsaustausch zur technischen Qualitätssicherung im digitalen Mammographie-Screening, 2007. www.bmu.de
9. Karssemejier N, Thijsen MAO. Determination of Contrast-Detail Curves of Mammography Systems by automated Image Analysis. In: Doi K, Giger ML, Nishikawa RM, Scmidt RA (Hrsg). Digital Mammography. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1996: 155-160
10. Thomas JA, Chakrabarti K, Romanyukha A. Contrast-Detail Phantom Scoring Methodology. Med Phys 2005; 3: 807-814
11. Performance of Mammographie Equipement in the UK Breast Screening Programme in 1998/99. Sheffield: NHSBSPPublication, 2000; 45
12. Metcher-Heath L, Van Metter R. Quantifying the Performance of Human and Software CDMAM Phantom Image Observer for the Qualification of digital Mammography Systems. Proceedings of SPIE 2005; 5745: 486-498 (Pubitemid 41146396)
13. Perez-Ponce H et al ECR, 2007: Poster C-791
14. DIN V ENV 13005, Leitfaden zur Angabe der Unsicherheit beim Messen bzw. "Guide to the expression of Uncertainty and Measurements (GUM)", ISO, Genf 1995. Berlin: Beuth Verlag, 1999
15. Schulz-Wendtland R et al. Image Quality in conventional screen-filmsystem, digital phosphor storage plate mammography in magnification technique and digital mammography in CCD-technology. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2001 ; 173: 965-968
16. Schulz-Wendtland R et al. Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Dosisreduktion durch Optimierung der Strahlungsqualität bei digitaler Vollfeldmammografie mit einem Detektor auf Selenbasis. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2007; 05: 487-491
17. Weigel S et al. Digital Mammography Screening: Average Glandular Dose and First Performance Parameters. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2007; 09: 892-895
18. Bosmanns H. MoniQA-Programm zur visuellen Inspektion von elektronischen Displays. Leuven, Belgien, 2006
19. Blendl C, Mohr M. MonitorSFR - SFR-Messungen an BWGs, DGMP-Jah-restagung, Regensburg 2006; 39: 40