4.6 Article

A dual-energy subtraction technique for microcalcification imaging in digital mammography - A signal-to-noise analysis

Journal

MEDICAL PHYSICS
Volume 29, Issue 8, Pages 1739-1751

Publisher

AMER ASSOC PHYSICISTS MEDICINE AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1118/1.1494832

Keywords

dual-energy subtraction imaging; digital mammography; microcalcifications; signal-to-noise ratio

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA51248] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Breast cancer may manifest as microcalcifications (muCs) in x-ray mammography. However, the detection and visualization of muCs are often obscured by the overlapping tissue structures. The dual-energy subtraction imaging technique offers an alternative approach for imaging and visualizing muCs. With this technique, separate high- and low-energy images are acquired and their differences are used to cancel out the background tissue structures. However, the subtraction process could increase the statistical noise level relative to the calcification contrast. Therefore, a key issue with the dual-energy subtraction imaging technique is to weigh the benefit of removing the cluttered background tissue structure over the drawback of reduced signal-to-noise ratio in the subtracted muC images. In this report, a theoretical framework for calculating the (quantum) noise in the subtraction images is developed and the numerical computations are described. We estimate the noise levels in the dual-energy subtraction signals under various imaging conditions, including the x-ray spectra, muC size, tissue composition, and breast thickness. The selection of imaging parameters is optimized to evaluate the feasibility of using a dual-energy subtraction technique for the improved detection and visualization of muCs. We present the results and discuss its dependence on imaging parameters. (C) 2002 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available