Dual-energy contrast-enhanced breast tomosynthesis: Optimization of beam quality for dose and image quality

Physics in Medicine and Biology

Volumn 56, Issue 19, 2011, Pages 6359-6378

  Samei, Ehsan ^a,b   Saunders, Robert S ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANATOMICAL NOISE; BREAST PHANTOM; BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS; CONTRAST-ENHANCED; DIGITAL TOMOSYNTHESIS; DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; DUAL-ENERGY; FLAT-PANEL DETECTORS; FUNCTIONAL INFORMATION; GLANDULAR DOSE; HIGH ENERGY; HIGH RESOLUTION; LOW ENERGIES; MAMMOGRAPHIC; MASS DETECTION; MONTE CARLO; MONTE CARLO MODEL; NOISE RATIO; OPTIMUM TECHNIQUE; PROJECTION IMAGE; RAY-TRACING ALGORITHM; RECONSTRUCTION SOFTWARE; WEIGHTING FACTORS;

COPPER; IMAGE QUALITY; IODINE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MONTE CARLO METHODS; MULTIPHOTON PROCESSES; OPTIMIZATION; RAY TRACING; SELENIUM; TIN; TUNGSTEN;

THREE DIMENSIONAL;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; METHODOLOGY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PATHOLOGY; PHOTON; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOGRAPHY; STANDARD;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PHOTONS; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOGRAPHY, DUAL-ENERGY SCANNED PROJECTION;

EID: 80053211249     PISSN: 00319155     EISSN: 13616560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/56/19/013     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Badano A, Kyprianou I S and Sempau J 2006 Anisotropic imaging performance in indirect x-ray imaging detectors Med. Phys. 33 2698
2. Badano A and Sempau J 2006 MANTIS: combined x-ray, electron and optical Monte Carlo simulations of indirect radiation imaging systems Phys. Med. Biol. 51 1545-61 (Pubitemid 43332354)
3. Beckett J R and Kotre C J 2000 Dosimetric implications of age related glandular changes in screening mammography Phys. Med. Biol. 45 801-13 (Pubitemid 30163665)
4. Bender J E, Kapadia A J, Sharma A C, Tourassi G D, Harrawood B P and Floyd J C E 2007 Breast cancer detection using neutron stimulated emission computed tomography: prominent elements and dose requirements Med. Phys. 34 3866-71 (Pubitemid 47482888)
5. Bissonnette M et al 2005 Digital breast tomosynthesis using an amorphous selenium flat panel detector Proc. SPIE 5745 529
6. Bloomquist A K et al 2006 Quality control for digital mammography in the ACRIN DMIST trial: part I Med. Phys. 33 719-36
7. Boone J M 2002 Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for arbitrary x-ray spectra in mammography: computer-fit values of Monte Carlo derived data Med. Phys. 29 869-75 (Pubitemid 34525916)
8. Boone J M, Fewell T R and Jennings R J 1997 Molybdenum, rhodium, and tungsten anode spectral models using interpolating polynomials with application to mammography Med. Phys. 24 1863-74 (Pubitemid 28013501)
9. Brent R P 1972 Algorithms for Minimization without Derivatives (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall)
10. Buist D S M, Porter P L, Lehman C, Taplin S H and White E 2004 Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years J. Natl Cancer Inst. 96 1432-40 (Pubitemid 39429667)
11. Carton A-K, Li J, Albert M, Chen S and Maidment A D A 2006 Quantification for contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis Proc. SPIE 6142 61420D
12. Carton A-K, Lindman K, Ullberg C, Francke T and Maidment A D A 2007 Dual-energy subtraction for contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis Proc. SPIE 6510 651007
13. Chen B, Shorey J, Nolte L, Saunders R S, Thompson J, Richard S and Samei E 2011 An anthropomorphic breast model for breast imaging simulation and optimization Acad. Radiol. 18 536-46
14. Chen S C, Carton A, Albert M, Conant E F, Schnall M D and Maidment A D 2007 Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis Acad. Radiol. 14 229
15. Cot A, Sempau J, Pareto D, Bullich S, Pavia J, Calvino F and Ros D 2002 Evaluation of the geometric, scatter, and septal penetration components in fan-beam collimators using Monte Carlo simulation IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 49 12
16. Dance D R, Skinner C L, Young K C, Beckett J R and Kotre C J 2000 Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol Phys. Med. Biol. 45 3225-40
17. Forsythe G E, Malcolm M A and Moler C B 1977 Computer Methods for Mathematical Computations (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall)
18. Glick S J and Didier C 2007 A computer simulation for evaluating dual-energy, contrast-enhanced breast tomosynthesis Proc. SPIE 6510 65102V
19. Hubbell J and Seltzer S M 2004 Tables of x-ray mass attenuation coefficients and mass energy-absorption coefficients (Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology) available at http://physics.nist.gov/ xaamdi (last accessed 20 January 2006)
20. Jamal N, Ng K H and McLean D 2003 A study of mean glandular dose during diagnostic mammography in Malaysia and some of the factors affecting it Br. J. Radiol. 76 238-45 (Pubitemid 36582068)
21. Klein R, Aichinger H, Dierker J, Jansen J T, Joite-Barfuss S, Sabel M, Schulz-Wendtland R and Zoetelief J 1997 Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients Phys. Med. Biol. 42 651-71 (Pubitemid 27195899)
22. MARIBS Study Group 2005 Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS) The Lancet 365 1769-78
23. Mertelmeier T, Orman J, Haerer W and Dudam M K 2006 Optimizing filtered backprojection reconstruction for a breast tomosynthesis prototype device Proc. SPIE 6142 61420F
24. National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2007 Clinical practice guidelines in oncology: genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian version 1.2007 available at http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/PDF/ genetics-screening.pdf (last accessed 25 July 2007)
25. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 2006 Familial breast cancer: the classification and care of women at risk of familial breast cancer in primary, secondary and tertiary care: CG 41 available at http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg41 (last accessed 25 July 2007)
26. National Institute of Standards and Technology 1992 ESTAR, PSTAR, and ASTAR: computer programs for calculating stopping-power and ranges for electrons, protons, and helium ions NIST Report NISTIR-4999 (Washington, DC: NIST)
27. Nock M L, Kempston M P, Mainprize J G and Yaffe M J 2007 Quantitative flow phantom for contrast-enhanced breast tomosynthesis Proc. SPIE 6510 65102W
28. Puong S, Bouchevreau X, Duchateau N, Iordache R and Muller S 2008 Optimization of beam parameters and iodine quantification in dual-energy contrast enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis Proc. SPIE 6913 69130Z
29. Puong S, Patoureaux F, Iordache R, Bouchevreau X and Muller S 2007 Dual-energy contrast enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis: concept, method, and evaluation on phantoms Proc. SPIE 6510 65100U
30. Robson M and Offit K 2007 Management of an inherited predisposition to breast cancer N. Engl. J. Med. 357 154-62 (Pubitemid 47057733)
31. Ruschin M et al 2007 Dose dependence of mass and microcalcification detection in digital mammography: free response human observer studies Med. Phys. 34 400
32. Samei E, Flynn M J and Eyler W R 1999 Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomic noise on chest radiographs Radiology 213 727-34
33. Snchez-Crespo A, Andreo P and Larsson S A 2004 Positron flight in human tissues and its influence on PET image spatial resolution Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 31 44
34. Saslow D et al (for the American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory) 2007 American cancer society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography CA Cancer J. Clin. 57 75-89 (Pubitemid 46535708)
35. Saunders R, Samei E, Badea C, Yuan H, Ghaghada K, Qi Y, Hedlund L W and Mukundan S 2008 Optimization of dual energy contrast enhanced breast tomosynthesis for improved mammographic lesion detection and diagnosis Proc. SPIE 6913 69130Y
36. Sempau J, Fernandez-Varea J M, Acosta E and Salvat F 2003 Experimental benchmarks of the Monte Carlo code PENELOPE Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 207 107-23
37. Zhao W, Zhao B, Fisher P R, Warmoes P, Mertelmeier T and Orman J 2007 Optimization of detector operation and imaging geometry for breast tomosynthesis Proc. SPIE 6510 65101M