4.6 Article

Dual-energy digital mammography: Calibration and inverse-mapping techniques to estimate calcification thickness and glandular-tissue ratio

期刊

MEDICAL PHYSICS
卷 30, 期 6, 页码 1110-1117

出版社

AMER ASSOC PHYSICISTS MEDICINE AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1118/1.1576394

关键词

dual-energy imaging; digital mammography; microcalcifications; inverse-mapping

资金

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

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Breast cancer may manifest as microcalcifications in x-ray mammography. Small microcalcifications, essential to the early detection of breast cancer, are often obscured by overlapping tissue structures. Dual-energy imaging, where separate low- and high-energy images are acquired and synthesized to cancel the tissue structures, may improve the ability to detect and visualize microcalcifications. Transmission measurements at two different kV(P) values were made on breast-tissue-equivalent materials under narrow-beam geometry using an indirect flat-panel mammographic imager. The imaging scenario consisted of variable aluminum thickness ( to simulate calcifications) and variable glandular ratio (defined as the ratio of the glandular-tissue thickness to the total tissue thickness) for a fixed total tissue thickness-the clinical situation of microcalcification imaging with varying tissue composition under breast compression. The coefficients of the inverse-mapping functions used to determine material composition from dual-energy measurements were calculated by a least-squares analysis. The linear function poorly modeled both the aluminum thickness and the glandular ratio. The inverse-mapping functions were found to vary as analytic functions of second (conic) or third (cubic) order. By comparing the model predictions with the calibration values, the root-mean-square residuals for both the cubic and the conic functions were similar to50 mum for the aluminum thickness and similar to0.05 for the glandular ratio. (C) 2003 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据