TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of tomosynthesis methods used with digital mammography
AU - Suryanarayanan, Sankararaman
AU - Karellas, Andrew
AU - Vedantham, Srinivasan
AU - Glick, Stephen J.
AU - D'Orsi, Carl J.
AU - Baker, Stephen P.
AU - Webber, Richard L.
N1 - Funding Information:
From the Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School-UMass Memorial Medical Center, Worcester (S.S., A.K., S.V., S.J.G., C.J.D., S.P.B.), and Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC (R.L.W.). Received February 29, 2000; revision requested June 15; revision received and accepted July 20. Supported by Na-lional Institutes of Health grant RO1-CA74106 from the National Cancer Institute. Address correspondence to A.K., Department of Radiology, $2-836, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Ave N, Worcester, MA 01655.
PY - 2000
Y1 - 2000
N2 - Rationale and Objectives. The authors performed this study to investigate the potential applicability of tomosynthesis to digital mammography. Four methods of tomosynthesis - tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT)-backprojection, TACT-iterative restoration, iterative reconstruction with expectation maximization, and Bayesian smoothing - were compared to planar mammography and analyzed in terms of their contrast-detail characteristics. Specific comparisons between the tomosynthesis methods were not attempted in this study. Materials and Methods. A full-field, amorphous, silicon-based, flat-panel digital mammographic system was used to obtain planar and tomosynthesis projection images. A composite tomosynthesis phantom with a centrally located contrast-detail insert was used as the object of interest. The total exposure for multiple views with tomosynthesis was always equal to or less than that for the planar technique. Algorithms were used to reconstruct the object from the acquired projections. Results. Threshold contrast characteristics with all tomosynthesis reconstruction methods were significantly better than those with planar mammography, even when planar mammography was performed at more than twice the exposure level. Reduction of out-of-plane structural components was observed in all the tomosynthesis methods analyzed. Conclusion. The contrast-detail trends of all the tomosynthesis methods analyzed in this study were better than those of planar mammography. Further optimization of the algorithms could lead to better image reconstruction, which would improve visualization of valuable diagnostic information.
AB - Rationale and Objectives. The authors performed this study to investigate the potential applicability of tomosynthesis to digital mammography. Four methods of tomosynthesis - tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT)-backprojection, TACT-iterative restoration, iterative reconstruction with expectation maximization, and Bayesian smoothing - were compared to planar mammography and analyzed in terms of their contrast-detail characteristics. Specific comparisons between the tomosynthesis methods were not attempted in this study. Materials and Methods. A full-field, amorphous, silicon-based, flat-panel digital mammographic system was used to obtain planar and tomosynthesis projection images. A composite tomosynthesis phantom with a centrally located contrast-detail insert was used as the object of interest. The total exposure for multiple views with tomosynthesis was always equal to or less than that for the planar technique. Algorithms were used to reconstruct the object from the acquired projections. Results. Threshold contrast characteristics with all tomosynthesis reconstruction methods were significantly better than those with planar mammography, even when planar mammography was performed at more than twice the exposure level. Reduction of out-of-plane structural components was observed in all the tomosynthesis methods analyzed. Conclusion. The contrast-detail trends of all the tomosynthesis methods analyzed in this study were better than those of planar mammography. Further optimization of the algorithms could lead to better image reconstruction, which would improve visualization of valuable diagnostic information.
KW - Breast neoplasms, diagnosis
KW - Breast radiography, technology
KW - Images, digitization
KW - Images, processing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033673866&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033673866&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S1076-6332(00)80061-6
DO - 10.1016/S1076-6332(00)80061-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 11131053
AN - SCOPUS:0033673866
SN - 1076-6332
VL - 7
SP - 1085
EP - 1097
JO - Academic radiology
JF - Academic radiology
IS - 12
ER -