Evaluation of linear and nonlinear tomosynthetic reconstruction methods in digital mammography
| dc.contributor.author | Suryanarayanan, Sankararaman | |
| dc.contributor.author | Karellas, Andrew | |
| dc.contributor.author | Vedantham, Srinivasan | |
| dc.contributor.author | Baker, Stephen P. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Glick, Stephen J. | |
| dc.contributor.author | D'Orsi, Carl J. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Webber, Richard L. | |
| dc.date | 2022-08-11T08:09:11.000 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-08-23T16:20:39Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-08-23T16:20:39Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2001-03-16 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2008-05-21 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Acad Radiol. 2001 Mar;8(3):219-24. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80530-5">Link to article on publisher's site</a> | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1076-6332 (Print) | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80530-5 | |
| dc.identifier.pmid | 11249085 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/35330 | |
| dc.description.abstract | RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate digital planar mammography and both linear and nonlinear tomosynthetic reconstruction methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A "disk" (ie, target) identification study was conducted to compare planar and reconstruction methods. Projective data using a composite phantom with circular disks were acquired in both planar and tomographic modes by using a full-field, digital mammographic system. Two-dimensional projections were reconstructed with both linear (ie, backprojection) and nonlinear (ie, maximization and minimization) tuned-aperture computed tomographic (TACT) methods to produce three-dimensional data sets. Four board-certified radiologists and one 4th-year radiology resident participated as observers. All images were compared by these observers in terms of the number of disks identified. RESULTS: Significant differences (P < .05, Bonferroni adjusted) were observed between all reconstruction and planar methods. No significant difference, however, was observed between the planar methods, and only a marginally significant difference (P < .054, Bonferroni adjusted) was observed between TACT-backprojection and TACT-minimization. CONCLUSION: A combination of linear and nonlinear reconstruction schemes may have potential implications in terms of enhancing image visualization to provide radiologists with valuable diagnostic information. | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | |
| dc.relation | <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11249085&dopt=Abstract ">Link to article in PubMed</a> | |
| dc.relation.url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80530-5 | |
| dc.subject | Breast Neoplasms | |
| dc.subject | Female | |
| dc.subject | Humans | |
| dc.subject | Mammography | |
| dc.subject | Phantoms, Imaging | |
| dc.subject | *Radiographic Image Enhancement | |
| dc.subject | Sensitivity and Specificity | |
| dc.subject | Radiology | |
| dc.title | Evaluation of linear and nonlinear tomosynthetic reconstruction methods in digital mammography | |
| dc.type | Journal Article | |
| dc.source.journaltitle | Academic radiology | |
| dc.source.volume | 8 | |
| dc.source.issue | 3 | |
| dc.identifier.legacycoverpage | https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/infoservices/78 | |
| dc.identifier.contextkey | 511497 | |
| html.description.abstract | <p>RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate digital planar mammography and both linear and nonlinear tomosynthetic reconstruction methods.</p> <p>MATERIALS AND METHODS: A "disk" (ie, target) identification study was conducted to compare planar and reconstruction methods. Projective data using a composite phantom with circular disks were acquired in both planar and tomographic modes by using a full-field, digital mammographic system. Two-dimensional projections were reconstructed with both linear (ie, backprojection) and nonlinear (ie, maximization and minimization) tuned-aperture computed tomographic (TACT) methods to produce three-dimensional data sets. Four board-certified radiologists and one 4th-year radiology resident participated as observers. All images were compared by these observers in terms of the number of disks identified.</p> <p>RESULTS: Significant differences (P < .05, Bonferroni adjusted) were observed between all reconstruction and planar methods. No significant difference, however, was observed between the planar methods, and only a marginally significant difference (P < .054, Bonferroni adjusted) was observed between TACT-backprojection and TACT-minimization.</p> <p>CONCLUSION: A combination of linear and nonlinear reconstruction schemes may have potential implications in terms of enhancing image visualization to provide radiologists with valuable diagnostic information.</p> | |
| dc.identifier.submissionpath | infoservices/78 | |
| dc.contributor.department | Department of Radiology | |
| dc.contributor.department | Department of Cell Biology | |
| dc.contributor.department | Information Services, Academic Computing Services | |
| dc.source.pages | 219-24 |