Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 9873918

A representation for mammographic image processing.

Abstract

Mammographic image analysis is typically performed using standard, general-purpose algorithms. We note the dangers of this approach and show that an alternative physics-model-based approach can be developed to calibrate the mammographic imaging process. This enables us to obtain, at each pixel, a quantitative measure of the breast tissue. The measure we use is h(int) and this represents the thickness of 'interesting' (non-fat) tissue between the pixel and the X-ray source. The thicknesses over the image constitute what we term the h(int) representation, and it can most usefully be regarded as a surface that conveys information about the anatomy of the breast. The representation allows image enhancement through removing the effects of degrading factors, and also effective image normalization since all changes in the image due to variations in the imaging conditions have been removed. Furthermore, the h(int) representation gives us a basis upon which to build object models and to reason about breast anatomy. We use this ability to choose features that are robust to breast compression and variations in breast composition. In this paper we describe the h(int) representation, show how it can be computed, and then illustrate how it can be applied to a variety of mammographic image processing tasks. The breast thickness turns out to be a key parameter in the computation of h(int), but it is not normally recorded. We show how the breast thickness can be estimated from an image, and examine the sensitivity of h(int) to this estimate. We then show how we can simulate any projective X-ray examination and can simulate the appearance of anatomical structures within the breast. We follow this with a comparison between the h(int) representation and conventional representations with respect to invariance to imaging conditions and the surrounding tissue. Initial results indicate that image analysis is far more robust when specific consideration is taken of the imaging process and the h(int) representation is used.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R Highnam, M Brady, B Shepstone. 1996. A representation for mammographic image processing.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1361-8415(01)80002-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comparison of 4 MV photon surface dose among Varian, Siemens, and Elekta linear accelerators for tangential breast treatment: a phantom study.

PURPOSE: We have compared the differences in a 4-MV photon surface dose among Varian, Siemens, and Elekta linear accelerators (linacs) with wedges for tangential breast treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The wedge factor and the surface dose were measured using a solid water phantom and an ion chamber for each linear accelerator with various field sizes and wedge angles. A tangential treatment plan was applied to an elliptical hollow cylinder water phantom with a radiochromic film placed thereon. A dose was delivered to a simulated target in the phantom, and the resulting dose distribution was analyzed using a film scanner. RESULTS: Varian's wedges resulted in the highest wedge factors, ranging from 0.37 to 0.75 depending on the wedge angles. Varian's wedges led to the highest normalized skin doses, ranging between 0.40 and 0.73 depending on the wedge angles and field sizes. In the cylinder phantom test with two tangential beams, the Varian linac provided a nearly 20% higher maximum dose than the Siemens and Elekta linacs. CONCLUSION: The Varian linac resulted in the highest surface doses, and the Elekta linac led to the lowest for nearly all the measurement conditions we employed, including open beams.

Breast Diseases↗

[Is the application of CAD useful for radiologists for passing the official tests required for outpatient breast imaging?].

PURPOSE: To analyze whether currently available CAD systems meet the diagnostic requirements for passing screening tests (first reader CAD) and to analyze whether the additional usage of CAD systems provides significant support for the diagnosing radiologist on the basis of official screening test cases (second reading by CAD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 200 images of 100 mammographies of 50 patients of an official screening test case collection were analyzed double-blind with and without CAD printouts (iCAD, USA ) by three radiologists: one experienced in breast analysis and CAD application, one experienced in mammography analysis but inexperienced in CAD usage, one with minimal experience with breast analysis and CAD application. All radiologists measured the largest diameter of any malignant mass. The mean value of these calculations was correlated to the largest diameter given by CAD prompts. RESULTS: The mean sensitivity and specificity increased slightly as a result of the additional usage of CAD (1 and 0.6 %, resp.). Both values are not statistically significant. The highest effect was measured for the radiologist with CAD experience, while no effect was measured for the inexperienced radiologist. CAD met the sensitivity requirements but not the specificity criteria (96 and 20.3 %, resp.). The sizes given by CAD prompts corresponded significantly with the real sizes (r = 0.45, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A statistically significant effect of the use of CAD could not been detected dependent on the radiological experience or the CAD experience. The effect of CAD on radiologists is still subtle despite the highly sensitive CAD performance due to the high number of false positive prompts and thus does not reach statistical significance. Sizes given by CAD prompts correlate significantly with the real sizes of malignant lesions.

Breast Diseases↗