Skip to main content

TU‐B‐M100J‐01: Optimizing Mammography Image Quality and Dose: X‐Ray Spectrum and Exposure Parameter Selection

Publication ,  Conference
Williams, M; Raghunathan, P; Seibert, JA; Kwan, A; lo, J; Samei, E; Ranger, N; Fajardo, L; Mcgruder, A; Maxwell, S; Maidment, A; Yaffe, M ...
Published in: Medical Physics
January 1, 2007

Optimization of exposure parameters (target, filter, and kVp) in digital mammography necessitates maximization of the image signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), while simultaneously minimizing patient dose. The goal of this talk is to compare, for each of the major commercially available full field mammography (FFDM) systems, the impact of the selection of technique factors on image SNR and radiation dose for a range of breast thickness and tissue types. The comparison will be based on the results of a multi‐center phantom study. The five commercial FFDM systems tested, the Senographe 2000D from GE Healthcare, the Mammomat Novation from Siemens, and the Selenia from Hologic, the Fischer Senoscan, and Fuji's 5000MA used with a Lorad M‐IV mammography unit, are located at five different university test sites. Performance was assessed using all available x‐ray target and filter combinations and nine different phantom types (three compressed thicknesses, and three tissue composition types). Each phantom type was also imaged using the automatic exposure control (AEC) of each system to identify the exposure parameters used under automated image acquisition. The figure of merit (FOM) used to compare technique factors is the ratio of the square of the image SNR to the mean glandular dose (MGD). The results show that, for a given target/filter combination, in general FOM is a slowly changing function of kVp, with stronger dependence on the choice of target/filter combination. In all cases the FOM was a decreasing function of kVp at the top of the available range of kVp settings, indicating that higher tube voltages would produce no further performance improvement. For a given phantom type, the exposure parameter set resulting in the highest FOM value was system‐specific, depending on both the set of available target/filter combinations, and on the receptor type. Noise performance differed noticeably among the FFDM systems and played an important role in determining relative FOM values. In most cases, the AECs of the FFDM systems successfully identified exposure parameters resulting in FOM values near the maximum ones, however there were several examples where AEC performance could be improved. Educational Objectives: 1. become familiar with the effect of changing kVp, target material, and filtration on the mean glandular dose for a variety of breast. 2. become familiar with the effect of changing kVp, target material, and filtration on image signal and noise for specific commercial FFDM systems. 3. learn how the exposure technique factors selected for a variety of breast types by the AECs of current FFDM systems compare with the technique factors resulting in optimal FOM values. © 2007, American Association of Physicists in Medicine. All rights reserved.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Medical Physics

DOI

ISSN

0094-2405

Publication Date

January 1, 2007

Volume

34

Issue

6

Start / End Page

2540 / 2541

Related Subject Headings

  • Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
  • 5105 Medical and biological physics
  • 4003 Biomedical engineering
  • 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis
  • 0903 Biomedical Engineering
  • 0299 Other Physical Sciences
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Williams, M., Raghunathan, P., Seibert, J. A., Kwan, A., lo, J., Samei, E., … Mawdsley, G. (2007). TU‐B‐M100J‐01: Optimizing Mammography Image Quality and Dose: X‐Ray Spectrum and Exposure Parameter Selection. In Medical Physics (Vol. 34, pp. 2540–2541). https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2761315
Williams, M., P. Raghunathan, J. A. Seibert, A. Kwan, J. lo, E. Samei, N. Ranger, et al. “TU‐B‐M100J‐01: Optimizing Mammography Image Quality and Dose: X‐Ray Spectrum and Exposure Parameter Selection.” In Medical Physics, 34:2540–41, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2761315.
Williams M, Raghunathan P, Seibert JA, Kwan A, lo J, Samei E, et al. TU‐B‐M100J‐01: Optimizing Mammography Image Quality and Dose: X‐Ray Spectrum and Exposure Parameter Selection. In: Medical Physics. 2007. p. 2540–1.
Williams, M., et al. “TU‐B‐M100J‐01: Optimizing Mammography Image Quality and Dose: X‐Ray Spectrum and Exposure Parameter Selection.” Medical Physics, vol. 34, no. 6, 2007, pp. 2540–41. Scopus, doi:10.1118/1.2761315.
Williams M, Raghunathan P, Seibert JA, Kwan A, lo J, Samei E, Ranger N, Fajardo L, Mcgruder A, Maxwell S, Maidment A, Yaffe M, Bloomquist A, Mawdsley G. TU‐B‐M100J‐01: Optimizing Mammography Image Quality and Dose: X‐Ray Spectrum and Exposure Parameter Selection. Medical Physics. 2007. p. 2540–2541.

Published In

Medical Physics

DOI

ISSN

0094-2405

Publication Date

January 1, 2007

Volume

34

Issue

6

Start / End Page

2540 / 2541

Related Subject Headings

  • Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
  • 5105 Medical and biological physics
  • 4003 Biomedical engineering
  • 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis
  • 0903 Biomedical Engineering
  • 0299 Other Physical Sciences