Dataset Information

Power spectrum analysis of the x-ray scatter signal in mammography and breast tomosynthesis projections.

ABSTRACT: To analyze the frequency domain characteristics of the signal in mammography images and breast tomosynthesis projections with patient tissue texture due to detected scattered x-rays.Acquisitions of x-ray projection images of 19 different patient breasts were simulated using previously acquired volumetric patient images. Acquisition of these images was performed with a dedicated breast CT prototype system, and the images were classified into voxels representing skin, adipose, and glandular tissue with a previously validated automated algorithm. The classified three dimensional images then underwent simulated mechanical compression representing that which is performed during acquisition of mammography and breast tomosynthesis images. The acquisition of projection images of each patient breast was simulated using Monte Carlo methods with each simulation resulting in two images: one of the primary (non-scattered) signal and one of the scatter signal. To analyze the scatter signal for both mammography and breast tomosynthesis, two projections images of each patient breast were simulated, one with the x-ray source positioned at 0° (mammography and central tomosynthesis projection) and at 30° (wide tomosynthesis projection). The noise power spectra (NPS) for both the scatter signal alone and the total signal (primary + scatter) for all images were obtained and the combined results of all patients analyzed. The total NPS was fit to the expected power-law relationship NPS(f) = k/f β and the results were compared with those previously published on the power spectrum characteristics of mammographic texture. The scatter signal alone was analyzed qualitatively and a power-law fit was also performed.The mammography and tomosynthesis projections of three patient breasts were too small to analyze, so a total of 16 patient breasts were analyzed. The values of β for the total signal of the 0° projections agreed well with previously published results. As expected, the scatter power spectrum reflected a fast drop-off with increasing spatial frequency, with a reduction of four orders of magnitude by 0.1 lp/mm. The β values for the scatter signal were 6.14 and 6.39 for the 0° and 30° projections, respectively.Although the low-frequency characteristics of scatter in mammography and breast tomosynthesis were known, a quantitative analysis of the frequency domain characteristics of this signal was needed in order to optimize previously proposed software-based x-ray scatter reduction algorithms for these imaging modalities.

SUBMITTER: Sechopoulos I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3785536 | biostudies-other | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To develop and evaluate the impact on lesion conspicuity of a software-based x-ray scatter correction algorithm for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging into which a precomputed library of x-ray scatter maps is incorporated.A previously developed model of compressed breast shapes undergoing mammography based on principal component analysis (PCA) was used to assemble 540 simulated breast volumes, of different shapes and sizes, undergoing DBT. A Monte Carlo (MC) simulation was used to generate the cranio-caudal (CC) view DBT x-ray scatter maps of these volumes, which were then assembled into a library. This library was incorporated into a previously developed software-based x-ray scatter correction, and the performance of this improved algorithm was evaluated with an observer study of 40 patient cases previously classified as BI-RADS® 4 or 5, evenly divided between mass and microcalcification cases. Observers were presented with both the original images and the scatter corrected (SC) images side by side and asked to indicate their preference, on a scale from -5 to +5, in terms of lesion conspicuity and quality of diagnostic features. Scores were normalized such that a negative score indicates a preference for the original images, and a positive score indicates a preference for the SC images.The scatter map library removes the time-intensive MC simulation from the application of the scatter correction algorithm. While only one in four observers preferred the SC DBT images as a whole (combined mean score = 0.169 ± 0.37, p > 0.39), all observers exhibited a preference for the SC images when the lesion examined was a mass (1.06 ± 0.45, p < 0.0001). When the lesion examined consisted of microcalcification clusters, the observers exhibited a preference for the uncorrected images (-0.725 ± 0.51, p < 0.009).The incorporation of the x-ray scatter map library into the scatter correction algorithm improves the efficiency of the algorithm. The observer study presented here is also the first test of the scatter correction algorithm with patient images and human observers, and demonstrates its potential to improve the clinical performance of DBT.

Project description:To develop a software-based scatter correction method for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging and investigate its impact on the image quality of tomosynthesis reconstructions of both phantoms and patients.A Monte Carlo (MC) simulation of x-ray scatter, with geometry matching that of the cranio-caudal (CC) view of a DBT clinical prototype, was developed using the Geant4 toolkit and used to generate maps of the scatter-to-primary ratio (SPR) of a number of homogeneous standard-shaped breasts of varying sizes. Dimension-matched SPR maps were then deformed and registered to DBT acquisition projections, allowing for the estimation of the primary x-ray signal acquired by the imaging system. Noise filtering of the estimated projections was then performed to reduce the impact of the quantum noise of the x-ray scatter. Three dimensional (3D) reconstruction was then performed using the maximum likelihood-expectation maximization (MLEM) method. This process was tested on acquisitions of a heterogeneous 50∕50 adipose∕glandular tomosynthesis phantom with embedded masses, fibers, and microcalcifications and on acquisitions of patients. The image quality of the reconstructions of the scatter-corrected and uncorrected projections was analyzed by studying the signal-difference-to-noise ratio (SDNR), the integral of the signal in each mass lesion (integrated mass signal, IMS), and the modulation transfer function (MTF).The reconstructions of the scatter-corrected projections demonstrated superior image quality. The SDNR of masses embedded in a 5 cm thick tomosynthesis phantom improved 60%-66%, while the SDNR of the smallest mass in an 8 cm thick phantom improved by 59% (p < 0.01). The IMS of the masses in the 5 cm thick phantom also improved by 15%-29%, while the IMS of the masses in the 8 cm thick phantom improved by 26%-62% (p < 0.01). Some embedded microcalcifications in the tomosynthesis phantoms were visible only in the scatter-corrected reconstructions. The visibility of the findings in two patient images was also improved by the application of the scatter correction algorithm. The MTF of the images did not change after application of the scatter correction algorithm, indicating that spatial resolution was not adversely affected.Our software-based scatter correction algorithm exhibits great potential in improving the image quality of DBT acquisitions of both phantoms and patients. The proposed algorithm does not require a time-consuming MC simulation for each specific case to be corrected, making it applicable in the clinical realm.

Project description:BackgroundOur objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the breast cancer detection rate (CDR), invasive CDR, recall rate, and positive predictive value 1 (PPV1) of digital mammography (DM) alone, combined digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and DM, combined DBT and synthetic 2-dimensional mammography (S2D), and DBT alone.MethodsMEDLINE and Embase were searched until April 2020 to identify comparative design studies reporting on patients undergoing routine breast cancer screening. Random effects model proportional meta-analyses estimated CDR, invasive CDR, recall rate, and PPV1. Meta-regression modeling was used to compare imaging modalities. All statistical tests were 2-sided.ResultsForty-two studies reporting on 2 606 296 patients (13 003 breast cancer cases) were included. CDR was highest in combined DBT and DM (6.36 per 1000 screened, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.62 to 7.14, P < .001), and combined DBT and S2D (7.40 per 1000 screened, 95% CI = 6.49 to 8.37, P < .001) compared with DM alone (4.68 per 1000 screened, 95% CI = 4.28 to 5.11). Invasive CDR was highest in combined DBT and DM (4.53 per 1000 screened, 95% CI = 3.97 to 5.12, P = .003) and combined DBT and S2D (5.68 per 1000 screened, 95% CI = 4.43 to 7.09, P < .001) compared with DM alone (3.42 per 1000 screened, 95% CI = 3.02 to 3.83). Recall rate was lowest in combined DBT and S2D (42.3 per 1000 screened, 95% CI = 37.4 to 60.4, P<.001). PPV1 was highest in combined DBT and DM (10.0%, 95% CI = 8.0% to 12.0%, P = .004), and combined DBT and S2D (16.0%, 95% CI = 10.0% to 23.0%, P < .001), whereas no difference was detected for DBT alone (7.0%, 95% CI = 6.0% to 8.0%, P = .75) compared with DM alone (7.0%, 95.0% CI = 5.0% to 8.0%).ConclusionsOur findings provide evidence on key performance metrics for DM, DBT alone, combined DBT and DM, and combined DBT and S2D, which may inform optimal application of these modalities for breast cancer screening.

Project description:Background Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density categories assigned by interpreting radiologists often influence decisions surrounding supplemental breast cancer screening and risk assessment. The landscape of mammographic screening continuously evolves, and different mammographic screening modalities may result in different perception of density, reflected in different assignment of BI-RADS density categories. Purpose To investigate the effect of screening mammography modality on BI-RADS breast density assessments. Materials and Methods Data were retrospectively analyzed from 24 736 individual women (42.3% [10 455 of 24 736] white women, 57.7% [14 281 of 24 736] black women; mean age, 56.3 years; age range, 40.0-74.9 years) who underwent from one to seven mammographic screening examinations from September 2010 through February 2017 (60 766 examinations). Three screening modalities were used: digital mammography alone (8935 examinations); digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT; 30 779 examinations); and synthetic mammography with DBT (21 052 examinations). Random-effects logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the likelihood of assignment to high versus low BI-RADS density category according to each modality, adjusted for ethnicity, age, body mass index (BMI), and radiologist. The interactions of modality with ethnicity and BMI on density categorization were also tested with the model. Results Women screened with DBT versus digital mammography alone had lower likelihood regarding categorization of high density breasts (digital mammography and DBT vs digital mammography: odds ratio, 0.69 [95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.80], P < .001; synthetic mammography and DBT vs digital mammography: odds ratio, 0.43 [95% confidence interval: 0.37, 0.50], P < .001). Lower likelihood of high density was also observed at synthetic mammography and DBT compared with digital mammography and DBT (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval: 0.56, 0.69; P < .001). There were interactions of modality with ethnicity (P = .007) and BMI (P = .003) on breast density assessment, with greater differences in density categorization according to modality observed for black women than for white women and groups with higher BMI. Conclusion Breast density categorization may vary by screening mammographic modality, and this effect appears to vary by ethnicity and body mass index. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Philpotts in this issue.

Project description:ImportanceMany US radiologists have screening mammography recall rates above the expert-recommended threshold of 12%. The influence of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) on the distribution of radiologist recall rates is uncertain.ObjectiveTo evaluate radiologists' recall and cancer detection rates before and after beginning interpretation of DBT examinations.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included 198 radiologists from 104 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium who interpreted 251?384 DBT and 2?000?681 digital mammography (DM) screening examinations from 2009 to 2017, including 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations during the study period and 72 (36.4%) who exclusively interpreted DM examinations (to adjust for secular trends). Data were analyzed from April 2018 to July 2019.ExposuresDigital breast tomosynthesis and DM screening examinations.Main outcomes and measuresRecall rate and cancer detection rate.ResultsA total of 198 radiologists interpreted 2?252?065 DM and DBT examinations (2?000?681 [88.8%] DM examinations; 251?384 [11.2%] DBT examinations; 710?934 patients [31.6%] aged 50-59 years; 1?448?981 [64.3%] non-Hispanic white). Among the 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations, 83 (65.9%) had unadjusted DM recall rates of no more than 12% before using DBT, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 10.0% (7.5%-13.0%). On DBT examinations, 96 (76.2%) had an unadjusted recall rate of no more than 12%, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 8.8% (6.3%-11.3%). A secular trend in recall rate was observed, with the multivariable-adjusted risk of recall on screening examinations declining by 1.2% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.5%) per year. After adjusting for examination characteristics and secular trends, recall rates were 15% lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use (relative risk, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87). Adjusted recall rates were significantly lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use for 45 radiologists (35.7%) and significantly higher for 18 (14.3%); 63 (50.0%) had no statistically significant change. The unadjusted cancer detection rate on DBT was 5.3 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 5.0-5.7 per 1000 examinations) compared with 4.7 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 4.6-4.8 per 1000 examinations) on DM examinations interpreted before DM use (multivariable-adjusted risk ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, DBT was associated with an overall decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate. However, our results indicated that there is wide variability among radiologists, including a subset of radiologists who experienced increased recall rates on DBT examinations. Radiology practices should audit radiologist DBT screening performance and consider additional DBT training for radiologists whose performance does not improve as expected.

Dataset Information

Power spectrum analysis of the x-ray scatter signal in mammography and breast tomosynthesis projections.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets