Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2014, Article ID 634856, 11 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/634856
Research Article

Figure of Image Quality and Information Capacity in Digital Mammography

1Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Technological Applications, Technological Educational Institution of Athens, Egaleo, 12210 Athens, Greece
2Department of Computer Science, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece
3Delta Digital Imaging Centre, 6 Semitelou Street, 11528 Athens, Greece
4Department of Electronic Engineering, School of Technological Applications, Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Athens, Egaleo, 12210 Athens, Greece
5Department of Energy Technology Engineering, School of Technological Applications, Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Athens, Egaleo, 12210 Athens, Greece

Received 21 November 2013; Revised 10 February 2014; Accepted 15 February 2014; Published 8 May 2014

Academic Editor: Hidetaka Arimura

Copyright © 2014 Christos M. Michail et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. A. Rowlands and J. Yorkston, Handbook of Medical Imaging, SPIE, Bellingham, Wash, USA, 2000.
  2. P. Sakellaropoulos, L. Costaridou, and G. Panayiotakis, “Using component technologies for web based wavelet enhanced mammographic image visualization,” Informatics for Health and Social Care, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 171–181, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. P. Sakellaropoulos, L. Costaridou, and G. Panayiotakis, “A wavelet-based spatially adaptive method for mammographic contrast enhancement,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 787–803, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. E. D. Pisano and M. J. Yaffe, “Digital mammography,” Radiology, vol. 234, no. 2, pp. 353–362, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. D. Albagli, H. Hudspeth, G. Possin, J. Lee, P. Granfors, and B. Giambattista, “Performance of advanced a-Si/CsI-based flat panel x-ray detectors for mammography,” in Medical Imaging: Physics of Medical Imaging, Proceedings of SPIE, pp. 553–563, June 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. E. P. Efstathopoulos, O. Benekos, M. Molfetas et al., “Quality assurance (QA) procedures for software: evaluation of an ADC quality system,” Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 117, no. 1–3, pp. 291–297, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. C. Michail, V. Spyropoulou, N. Kalyvas et al., “The influence of software filtering in digital mammography image quality,” Journal of Instrumentation, vol. 4, no. 5, Article ID P05018, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. N. Lanconelli, S. Rivetti, P. Golinelli, R. Sansone, M. Bertolini, and G. Borasi, “Physical and psychophysical characterization of a GE Senographe DS clinical system,” in Medical Imaging: Physics of Medical Imaging, vol. 6510 of Proceedings of SPIE, March 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. L. Costaridou, S. Skiadopoulos, P. Sakellaropoulos, E. Likaki, C. P. Kalogeropoulou, and G. Panayiotakis, “Evaluating the effect of a wavelet enhancement method in characterization of simulated lesions embedded in dense breast parenchyma,” European Radiology, vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 1615–1622, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. I. A. Tsalafoutas, G. A. Blastaris, A. S. Moutsatsos, P. S. Chios, and E. P. Efstathopoulos, “Correlation of image quality with exposure index and processing protocol in a computed radiography system,” Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 130, no. 2, pp. 162–171, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. H. Delis, G. Spyrou, L. Costaridou, G. Tzanakos, and G. Panayiotakis, “Evaluating the Figure of Merit in mammography utilizing Monte Carlo simulation,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, vol. 580, no. 1, pp. 493–496, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. J. A. Seibert, “Tradeoffs between image quality and dose,” Pediatric Radiology, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. S183–S195, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. R. Moeckli, F. R. Verdun, F. O. Bochud, J.-F. Valley, C. Hessler, and P. Schnyder, “Comparison of subjective and objective evaluation of screen-film systems for chest radiography,” Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 80, no. 1–3, pp. 265–268, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. G. A. Mohr and P. Willems, “Factors affecting probability of detection with computed radiography,” in Proceedings of the 17th World Conference on Nondestructive Testing, Shanghai, China, 2008.
  15. M. Mahesh, “AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents. Digital mammography: an overview,” Radiographics, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1747–1760, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. G. T. Barnes, The Physics of Medical Imaging: Recording System, Measurements and Techniques, American Association of Physicists in Medicine, New York, NY, USA, 1979.
  17. ICRU (International Commission on Radiological Units), “Modulation transfer functions of screen-film systems,” ICRU Report 41, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  18. E. P. Efstathopoulos, L. Costaridou, O. Kocsis, and G. Panayiotakis, “A protocol-based evaluation of medical image digitizers,” British Journal of Radiology, vol. 74, no. 885, pp. 841–846, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. B. Norman Nill, “Conversion between sine wave and square wave spatial frequency response of an imaging system,” MITRE Technical Report MTR 01B0000021, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  20. R. F. Wagner, D. G. Brown, and M. S. Pastel, “Application of information theory to the assessment of computed tomography,” Medical Physics, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 83–94, 1979. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. U. Neitzel, S. Günther-Kohfahl, G. Borasi, and E. Samei, “Determination of the detective quantum efficiency of a digital x-ray detector: comparison of three evaluations using a common image data set,” Medical Physics, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 2205–2211, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. H. Arimura, H. Kubota, M. Matsumoto, and H. Kanamori, “Proportionality between Wiener spectra of quantum mottle and the squares of modulation transfer functions,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 1337–1352, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. N. Kalivas, L. Costaridou, I. Kandarakis, D. Cavouras, C. D. Nomicos, and G. Panayiotakis, “Modeling quantum and structure noise of phosphors used in medical X-ray imaging detectors,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, vol. 490, no. 3, pp. 614–629, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. J. C. Dainty and R. Shaw, Image Science, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1974.
  25. M. B. Williams, P. A. Mangiafico, and P. U. Simoni, “Noise power spectra of images from digital mammography detectors,” Medical Physics, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1279–1293, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. C. M. Michail, G. P. Fountos, I. G. Valais et al., “Evaluation of the red emitting Gd2O2S: eu powder scintillator for use in indirect X-ray digital mammography detectors,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 2503–2511, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. K. Stierstorfer and M. Spahn, “Self-normalizing method to measure the detective quantum efficiency of a wide range of x-ray detectors,” Medical Physics, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1312–1319, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. G. Borasi, A. Nitrosi, P. Ferrari, and D. Tassoni, “On site evaluation of three flat panel detectors for digital radiography,” Medical Physics, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 1719–1731, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. H. Bosmans, A.-K. Carton, F. Rogge et al., “Image quality measurements and metrics in full field digital mammography: an overview,” Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 117, no. 1–3, pp. 120–130, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. P. Monnin, D. Gutierrez, S. Bulling, D. Guntern, and F. R. Verdun, “A comparison of the performance of digital mammography systems,” Medical Physics, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 906–914, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. M. J. Yaffe, G. T. Barnes, and C. G. Orton, “Film mammography for breast cancer screening in younger women is no longer appropriate because of the demonstrated superiority of digital mammography for this age group,” Medical Physics, vol. 33, no. 11, pp. 3979–3982, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. J. T. Dobbins III, “Effects of undersampling on the proper interpretation of modulation transfer function, noise power spectra, and noise equivalent quanta of digital imaging systems,” Medical Physics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 171–182, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. J. T. Dobbins III, Handbook of Medical Imaging, SPIE, Bellingham, Wash, USA, 2000.
  34. R. F. Wagner and D. G. Brown, “Unified SNR analysis of medical imaging systems,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 489–518, 1985. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. W. Hillen, U. Schiebel, and T. Zaengel, “Imaging performance of a digital storage phosphor system,” Medical Physics, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 744–751, 1987. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. S. Suryanarayanan, A. Karellas, S. Vedantham, and S. K. Onishi, “High-resolution imager for digital mammography: physical characterization of a prototype sensor,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, vol. 50, no. 17, pp. 3957–3969, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. C. E. Shannon, “A mathematical theory of communication,” Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 27, pp. 379–423, 1948. View at Google Scholar
  38. R. C. Jones, “Information capacity of radiation detectors I,” Journal of the Optical Society of America, vol. 50, pp. 1166–1170, 1961. View at Google Scholar
  39. R. C. Jones, “Information capacity of radiation detectors II,” Journal of the Optical Society of America, vol. 52, pp. 1193–1200, 1962. View at Google Scholar
  40. H. Kanamori, “Information capacity of radiographic films,” Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 7, pp. 414–421, 1968. View at Google Scholar
  41. M. A. Maiorchuk, V. V. Nikitin, and V. D. Samoilov, “Possible recording of Fourier holograms with an information capacity of the order of 107 bit/mm2,” Soviet Journal of Quantum Electronics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 168–171, 1974. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. D. G. Brown, M. P. Anderson, and R. F. Wagner, “Information capacity considerations in medical imaging,” Proceedings of the Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, vol. 206, pp. 77–82, 1979. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. R. Shaw, The Physics of Medical Imaging: Recording System, Measurements and Techniques, American Association of Physicists in Medicine, New York, NY, USA, 1979.
  44. A. L. Evans, The Evaluation of Medical Images, Adam Hilger, Bristol, UK, 1981.
  45. H. Kanamori and M. Matsumoto, “The information spectrum as a measure of radiographic image quality and system performance,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 303–313, 1984. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. E. C. Gregg, “Modulation transfer function, information capacity and performance criteria of scintiscans,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 116–127, 1968. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. C. E. Shannon, “Communication in the presence of noise,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 447–457, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. C. M. Michail, V. A. Spyropoulou, G. P. Fountos et al., “Experimental and theoretical evaluation of a high resolution CMOS based detector under X-ray imaging conditions,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 314–322, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. I. E. Seferis, C. M. Michail, I. G. Valais et al., “On the response of a europium doped phosphor-coated CMOS digital imaging detector,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, vol. 729, pp. 307–315, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  50. K. C. Young, J. M. Oduko, and L. Woolley, “Technical evaluation of the Hologic Selenia full field digital mammography system,” NHSBSP National Coordinating Centre for the Physics of Mammography Guildford Equipment Report 070, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  51. C. Michail, S. David, P. Liaparinos et al., “Evaluation of the imaging performance of LSO powder scintillator for use in X-ray mammography,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, vol. 580, no. 1, pp. 558–561, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. F. Rogge, H. Bosmans, P. Willems, and G. Marchal, “The use of MTF calculation in global and local resolution assessment in digital mammography,” in Medical Imaging: Physics of Medical Imaging, Proceedings of SPIE, pp. 896–907, February 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. G. E. Shen, S. Mawdsley, A. K. Bloomquist, J. G. Mainprize, and M. J. Yaffe, “Interpreting system MTF and NPS measured on clinical digital mammography systems,” in International Workshop on Database Machines (IWDM '02), pp. 123–127, Bremen, Germany, 2002.
  54. R. M. Nishikawa and M. J. Yaffe, “Effect of finite phosphor thickness on detective quantum efficiency,” Medical Physics, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 773–780, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. R. M. Nishikawa and M. J. Yaffe, “Model of the spatial-frequency-dependent detective quantum efficiency of phosphor screens,” Medical Physics, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 894–904, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. V. D. Gesù and V. Starovoitov, “Distance-based functions for image comparison,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 207–214, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. J. A. Stark and W. J. Fitzgerald, “Model-based adaptive histogram equalization,” Signal Processing, vol. 39, no. 1-2, pp. 193–200, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. H. Arimura, S. Katsuragawa, K. Suzuki et al., “Computerized scheme for automated detection of lung nodules in low-dose computed tomography images for lung cancer screening,” Academic Radiology, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 617–629, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. A. E. Carpenter, T. R. Jones, M. R. Lamprecht et al., “CellProfiler: image analysis software for identifying and quantifying cell phenotypes,” Genome Biology, vol. 7, no. 10, article R100, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. A. Eklund, P. Dufort, D. Forsberg, and S. M. LaConte, “Processing on the GPU-Past, present and future,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 17, pp. 1073–1094, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  61. T. S. Spisz and I. N. Bankman, Handbook of Medical Imaging, Academic Press, San Diego, Calif, USA, 2000.
  62. S. E. Mahmoudi, A. Akhondi-Asl, R. Rahmani et al., “Web-based interactive 2D/3D medical image processing and visualization software,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 172–182, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. ImageJ 1.47h, Wayne Rasband, National Institutes of Heatlh, USA, http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/.
  64. T. L. Yang, H. L. Liang, C. P. Chou, J. S. Huang, and H. B. Pan, “The adjunctive digital breast tomosynthesis in diagnosis of breast cancer,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2013, Article ID 597253, 7 pages, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  65. H. Arimura, Q. Li, Y. Korogi et al., “Computerized detection of intracranial aneurysms for three-dimensional MR angiography: feature extraction of small protrusions based on a shape-based difference image technique,” Medical Physics, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 394–401, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. G. E. Karpetas, C. M. Michail, G. P. Fountos, P. N. Valsamaki, I. S. Kandarakis, and G. S. Panayiotakis, “Towards the optimization of nuclear medicine procedures for better spatial resolution, sensitivity, scan image quality and quantitation measurements by using a new Monte Carlo model featuring PET imaging,” Hellenic Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 162, pp. 111–120, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  67. G. P. Fountos, C. M. Michail, A. Zanglis et al., “A novel easy-to-use phantom for the determination of MTF in SPECT scanners,” Medical Physics, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 1561–1570, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. S. N. Friedman, G. S. Fung, J. H. Siewerdsen, and B. M. Tsui, “A simple approach to measure computed tomography (CT) modulation transfer function (MTF) and noise-power spectrum (NPS) using the American College of 435 Radiology (ACR) accreditation phantom,” Medical Physics, vol. 40, Article ID 051907, 2013. View at Google Scholar