Abstract
Digital mammography is the current standard for breast cancer screening, however breast tomosynthesis and breast CT (bCT) have been studied in clinical trials. At our institution, 30 women (BIRADS 4 and 5) underwent IRB-approved imaging by mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and bCT on the same day. Twenty three data sets were used for analysis. The 2D noise power spectrum (NPS) was computed and averaged for each data set. The NPS was computed for different slice thicknesses of dx × N, where dx ≈ 0.3 mm and N=1-64, on the bCT data. Each 2D NPS was radially averaged, and the 1D data were fit using a power law function as proposed by Burgess: NPS(f) = αf-β. The value of β was determined over a range of frequencies corresponding to anatomical noise, for each patient and each modality. Averaged over the 30 women (26 for bCT, 28 for tomosynthesis, 28 for mammography), for mammography β=3.06 (0.25), for CC tomosynthesis β=2.91 (0.35), and for axial bCT β=1.72 (0.47). For sagittal bCT β=1.77 (0.36) and for coronal bCT, β=1.88 (0.45). The computation of β versus slice thickness on the coronal bCT data set led to β≈1.7 for N=1, asymptotically reaching β ≈ 3 for larger slice thickness. These results suggest that there is a fundamental difference in breast anatomic noise as characterized by β, between thin slices (<2 mm) and thicker slices. Tomosynthesis was found to have anatomic noise properties closer to mammography than breast CT, most likely due to the relatively thick slice sensitivity profile of tomosynthesis.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE |
| Volume | 7961 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2011 |
| Event | Medical Imaging 2011: Physics of Medical Imaging - Lake Buena Vista, FL, United States Duration: Feb 13 2011 → Feb 17 2011 |
Other
| Other | Medical Imaging 2011: Physics of Medical Imaging |
|---|---|
| Country | United States |
| City | Lake Buena Vista, FL |
| Period | 2/13/11 → 2/17/11 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- breast cancer
- computed tomography
- Mammography
- tomosynthesis
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics
- Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials
- Biomaterials
- Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Cite this
NPS comparison of anatomical noise characteristics in mammography, tomosynthesis, and breast CT images using power law metrics. / Chen, Lin; Boone, John M; Nosratieh, Anita; Abbey, Craig K.
Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE. Vol. 7961 2011. 79610F.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution
}
TY - GEN
T1 - NPS comparison of anatomical noise characteristics in mammography, tomosynthesis, and breast CT images using power law metrics
AU - Chen, Lin
AU - Boone, John M
AU - Nosratieh, Anita
AU - Abbey, Craig K.
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - Digital mammography is the current standard for breast cancer screening, however breast tomosynthesis and breast CT (bCT) have been studied in clinical trials. At our institution, 30 women (BIRADS 4 and 5) underwent IRB-approved imaging by mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and bCT on the same day. Twenty three data sets were used for analysis. The 2D noise power spectrum (NPS) was computed and averaged for each data set. The NPS was computed for different slice thicknesses of dx × N, where dx ≈ 0.3 mm and N=1-64, on the bCT data. Each 2D NPS was radially averaged, and the 1D data were fit using a power law function as proposed by Burgess: NPS(f) = αf-β. The value of β was determined over a range of frequencies corresponding to anatomical noise, for each patient and each modality. Averaged over the 30 women (26 for bCT, 28 for tomosynthesis, 28 for mammography), for mammography β=3.06 (0.25), for CC tomosynthesis β=2.91 (0.35), and for axial bCT β=1.72 (0.47). For sagittal bCT β=1.77 (0.36) and for coronal bCT, β=1.88 (0.45). The computation of β versus slice thickness on the coronal bCT data set led to β≈1.7 for N=1, asymptotically reaching β ≈ 3 for larger slice thickness. These results suggest that there is a fundamental difference in breast anatomic noise as characterized by β, between thin slices (<2 mm) and thicker slices. Tomosynthesis was found to have anatomic noise properties closer to mammography than breast CT, most likely due to the relatively thick slice sensitivity profile of tomosynthesis.
AB - Digital mammography is the current standard for breast cancer screening, however breast tomosynthesis and breast CT (bCT) have been studied in clinical trials. At our institution, 30 women (BIRADS 4 and 5) underwent IRB-approved imaging by mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and bCT on the same day. Twenty three data sets were used for analysis. The 2D noise power spectrum (NPS) was computed and averaged for each data set. The NPS was computed for different slice thicknesses of dx × N, where dx ≈ 0.3 mm and N=1-64, on the bCT data. Each 2D NPS was radially averaged, and the 1D data were fit using a power law function as proposed by Burgess: NPS(f) = αf-β. The value of β was determined over a range of frequencies corresponding to anatomical noise, for each patient and each modality. Averaged over the 30 women (26 for bCT, 28 for tomosynthesis, 28 for mammography), for mammography β=3.06 (0.25), for CC tomosynthesis β=2.91 (0.35), and for axial bCT β=1.72 (0.47). For sagittal bCT β=1.77 (0.36) and for coronal bCT, β=1.88 (0.45). The computation of β versus slice thickness on the coronal bCT data set led to β≈1.7 for N=1, asymptotically reaching β ≈ 3 for larger slice thickness. These results suggest that there is a fundamental difference in breast anatomic noise as characterized by β, between thin slices (<2 mm) and thicker slices. Tomosynthesis was found to have anatomic noise properties closer to mammography than breast CT, most likely due to the relatively thick slice sensitivity profile of tomosynthesis.
KW - breast cancer
KW - computed tomography
KW - Mammography
KW - tomosynthesis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955786240&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79955786240&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1117/12.878391
DO - 10.1117/12.878391
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:79955786240
SN - 9780819485038
VL - 7961
BT - Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE
ER -