Evaluation of subject contrast and normalized average glandular dose by semi-analytical models

Applied Radiation and Isotopes

Volumn 68, Issue 4-5, 2010, Pages 755-759

  Tomal, A ^a   Poletti, M E ^a   Caldas, L V E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b INSTITUTO DE PESQUISAS ENERGÉTICAS E NUCLEARES   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Detection limits; Mammography; Normalized average glandular dose; Subject contrast

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL MODELS; INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS; MAMMOGRAPHY;

AVERAGE GLANDULAR DOSE; DETECTION LIMITS; SEMI-ANALYTICAL METHODS; SEMI-ANALYTICAL MODEL; SUBJECT CONTRAST;

MONTE CARLO METHODS;

ARTICLE; BREAST; BREAST COMPOSITION; BREAST THICKNESS; CALCULATION; MAMMOGRAPHY; MODEL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NORMALIZED AVERAGE GLANDULAR DOSE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; SUBJECT CONTRAST; THICKNESS;

EID: 77949274543     PISSN: 09698043     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apradiso.2009.09.040     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Berger M.J., Hubbell J.H., Seltzer, S.M., Chang, J., Coursey, J.S., Sukumar, R., Zucker, D.S., 2005. XCOM: photon cross section database (version 1.3). Available at 〈http://physics.nist.gov/xcom〉.
2. Boone J.M., Fewell T.R., and Jennings R.J. Molybdenum, rhodium, and tungsten anode spectral models using interpolation polynomials with application to mammography. Med. Phys. 24 (1997) 1863-1875
3. Boone J.M., and Cooper V.N. Scatter/primary in mammography: Monte Carlo validation. Med. Phys. 27 (2000) 1818-1831
4. Boone J.M. Glandular breast dose for monoenergetic and high-energy X-ray beams: Monte Carlo assessment. Radiology 213 (1999) 23-37
5. Brodie I., and Gutcheck R.A. Radiographic information theory and application to mammography. Med. Phys. 9 (1982) 79-94
6. Carlsson G.A., Carlsson C.A., Nielsen B., and Persliden J. Generalized use of contrast degradation and contrast improvement factors in diagnostic radiology, application to vanishing contrast. Phys. Med. Biol. 31 (1986) 737-749
7. Dance D.R. Monte Carlo calculation of conversion factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose. Phys. Med. Biol. 35 (1990) 1211-1219
8. Dance D.R., Persliden J., and Carlsson G.A. Calculation of the dose and contrast for two mammographic grids. Phys. Med. Biol. 37 (1992) 235-248
9. Dance D.R., Skinner C.L., Young K.C., Beckett J.R., and Kotre C.J. Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol. Phys. Med. Biol. 45 (2000) 3225-3240
10. Dance D.R., Klang A.T., Sandborg M., Smith A.C., and Carlsson G.A. Influence of anode/filter material and tube potential on contrast, signal-to-noise ratio and average absorbed dose in mammography: a Monte Carlo study. Br. J. Radiol. 73 (2000) 1056-1067
11. Del Guerra A., Belcari N., Bencivelli W., Motta A., Righi S., Vaiano A., Di Domenico G., Moretti E., Sabba N., Zavattini G., Campanini R., Lanconelli N., Riccardi A., Cinti M.N., Pani R., and Pellegrini R. Monte Carlo study and experimental measurements of breast tumor detectability with the YAP-PEM prototype. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 3 (2002) 1887-1891
12. Delis H., Spyrou G., Costaridou L., Tzanakos G., and Panayiotakis G. Suitability of new anode materials in mammography: dose and subject contrast considerations using Monte Carlo simulation. Med. Phys. 33 (2006) 4221-4235
13. Gingold E.L., Wu X., and Barnes G.T. Contrast and dose with Mo-Mo, Mo-Rh and Rh-Rh target-filter combinations in mammography. Radiology 195 (1995) 639-644
14. Hammerstein G.R., Miller D.W., White D.R., Masterson M.E., Woodard H.Q., and Laughlin J.S. Absorbed radiation dose in mammography. Radiology 130 (1979) 485-491
15. Hubbell J.H., Veigele W.J., Briggs E.A., Brown R.T., Cromer D.T., and Howerton R.J. Atomic form factors, incoherent scattering functions and photon scattering cross sections. J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 4 (1975) 471-538
16. Kharrati H., and Zarrad B. Computation of beam quality parameters for Mo/Mo, Mo/Rh, and W/Al target/filter combinations in mammography. Med. Phys. 30 (2003) 2638-2642
17. Koutalonis M., Delis H., Spyrou G., Costaridou L., Tzanakos G., and Panayiotakis G.. Monte Carlo generated conversion factors for the estimation of average glandular dose in contact and magnification mammography. Phys. Med. Biol. 51 21 (2006) 5539-5548
18. Leclair R.J., and Johns P.C. Optimum momentum transfer arguments for X-ray forward scatter imaging. Med. Phys. 29 (2002) 2881-2890
19. Magalhães S.D., Eichler J., and Gonçalves O. Calculation on X-ray scattering of 17.4 keV radiation and image degradation in mammography. Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 95 (1995) 87-90
20. Motz J.W., and Danos M. Image information content and patient exposure. Med. Phys. 5 (1978) 8-22
21. Tomal, A., Mazarro, I., Kakuno, E.M., Poletti, M.E., 2009. Experimental determination of linear attenuation coefficient of normal, benign and malignant breast tissues. Radiat. Phys. Chem., submitted for publication.
22. Vyborny C.J., and Schimidt R.A. Technical image quality and the visibility of mammographic detail. RSNA Categorical Course in Phys. (1994) 103-111
23. Wagner, A.J., 1991. Contrast and grid performance in mammography. In: Barnes, G.T., Frey, G.D. (Eds.), Screen Film Mammography: Imaging Considerations and Medical Physics Responsibilities, Madison, WI, Med. Phys. 25, pp. 115-134.
24. Wong J.W., Henkelman R.M., Fenster A., and Johns H.E. Second scatter contribution to dose in a Co-60 beam. Med. Phys. 8 (1981) 775-782
25. Wu X., Barnes G.T., and Turker D.M. Spectral dependence of glandular tissue dose in screen-film mammography. Radiology 179 (1991) 143-148
26. Wu X., Barnes G.T., Gingold E.L., and Turker D.M. Normalized average glandular dose in molybdenum target-rhodium filter and rhodium target-rhodium filter mammography. Radiology 193 (1994) 83-89
27. Yaffe M.J., Jennings R.J., Fahrig R., and Fewell T.R. X-ray spectral considerations for mammography. RSNA Categorical Course Phys. (1994) 63-73
28. Zoetelief J., and Jansen J.T.M. Calculation of air kerma to average glandular tissue dose conversion factors for mammography. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 57 (1995) 397-400