A technique optimization protocol and the potential for dose reduction in digital mammography.
Digital mammography requires revisiting techniques that have been optimized for prior screen/film mammography systems. The objective of the study was to determine optimized radiographic technique for a digital mammography system and demonstrate the potential for dose reduction in comparison to the clinically established techniques based on screen- film. An objective figure of merit (FOM) was employed to evaluate a direct-conversion amorphous selenium (a-Se) FFDM system (Siemens Mammomat Novation(DR), Siemens AG Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany) and was derived from the quotient of the squared signal-difference-to-noise ratio to mean glandular dose, for various combinations of technique factors and breast phantom configurations including kilovoltage settings (23-35 kVp), target/filter combinations (Mo-Mo and W-Rh), breast-equivalent plastic in various thicknesses (2-8 cm) and densities (100% adipose, 50% adipose/50% glandular, and 100% glandular), and simulated mass and calcification lesions. When using a W-Rh spectrum, the optimized FOM results for the simulated mass and calcification lesions showed highly consistent trends with kVp for each combination of breast density and thickness. The optimized kVp ranged from 26 kVp for 2 cm 100% adipose breasts to 30 kVp for 8 cm 100% glandular breasts. The use of the optimized W-Rh technique compared to standard Mo-Mo techniques provided dose savings ranging from 9% for 2 cm thick, 100% adipose breasts, to 63% for 6 cm thick, 100% glandular breasts, and for breasts with a 50% adipose/50% glandular composition, from 12% for 2 cm thick breasts up to 57% for 8 cm thick breasts.
Ranger
Nicole T
NT
Department of Radiology, Carl E. Ravin Advanced Imaging Laboratories, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA. nicole.ranger@duke.edu
Lo
Joseph Y
JY
Samei
Ehsan
E
D000465:Algorithms; D001822:Body Burden; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008327:Mammography / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011786:Quality Control; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011835:Radiation Protection / Q000379:methods*; D011856:Radiographic Image Enhancement / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D011857:Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
Med Phys. 2005 Feb;32(2):588-99
15789606
Eur J Radiol. 1999 Jul;31(1):25-34
10477095
Radiology. 2005 Feb;234(2):353-62
15670993
Br J Radiol. 2006 Dec;79(948):981-90
17213303
Rofo. 2000 Dec;172(12):1052-6
11199434
Radiology. 1999 Oct;213(1):7-10
10540634
Med Phys. 1997 Dec;24(12):1863-74
9434969
Rofo. 2009 Mar;181(3):249-54
19241602
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):220-9
15933112
Eur Radiol. 2007 Sep;17(9):2368-75
17268798
Med Phys. 2006 Nov;33(11):4337-49
17153413
Cancer Control. 2007 Oct;14(4):338-49
17914334
Med Phys. 2008 Jun;35(6):2414-23
18649474
Med Phys. 2007 Feb;34(2):400-7
17388156
Br J Radiol. 2003 Jul;76(907):478-82
12857708
Acad Radiol. 2002 Jul;9(7):764-72
12139090
Eur Radiol. 2006 Jan;16(1):38-44
16132935
Med Phys. 2003 Mar;30(3):334-40
12674233
Med Phys. 2006 Nov;33(11):4221-35
17153401
Med Phys. 2009 Mar;36(3):765-75
19378737
Br J Radiol. 2000 Oct;73(874):1056-67
11271898
Radiology. 1999 Oct;213(1):23-37
10540637
Med Phys. 2008 Nov;35(11):4878-97
19070222
Radiology. 2007 May;243(2):396-404
17356178
Phys Med Biol. 2005 Apr 21;50(8):1851-70
15815100