Abstract
The purpose of this work was to compare the detection accuracy of 3-dimensional (3D) modalities of tuned-aperture computed tomography (TACT) with that of conventional 2-dimensional (2D) digital spot mammograms. A standardized mammographic phantom was placed beneath cadaveric breast tissues of varying densities. Five radiologists were asked to detect as many objects (specks, fibers, and lowcontrast masses) as possible from 90 displays in a controlled and factorially balanced multivariate experiment. Radiographic exposure was varied systematically, and projections were averaged to ensure stochastic comparability. Scores were weighted to eliminate task-specific bias and were analyzed by multivariate analyses of variance. All display modalities based on the linear application of the 3D TACT reconstruction method yielded significantly higher detection scores for all tasks than did conventional 2D digital spot mammography, which served as the scientific control modality. This effect was found to be statistically significant (P<.001) in spite of significant variations between tissues (P<.001), observers (P<.001), and exposures (P<.01). TACT may be a promising alternative or enhancement to conventional 2D digital mammography for tasks well simulated by this experimental design.
Key Words: computed tomography, three-dimensional, observer performance, digital radiography, breast radiography, tomosynthesis
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (2.3 MB).
Footnotes
This research was supported in part by a technology development grant from North Carolina Baptist Hospital (No. NCBH A0195) and two grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH 5 RO1 CA 7416-02 and NIH Training Grant 5 T35 DK-07400-19).
TACT is a registered trademark for Tuned-Aperture Computed Tomography.
References
- 1.Tabár L, Dean PB. Basic principles of mammographic diagnosis. Diagnostic Imaging Clin Med. 1985;54:146–157. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Sickles EA. Findings at mammographic screening on only one standard projection: Outcomes analysis. Radiology. 1998;208:471–475. doi: 10.1148/radiology.208.2.9680578. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.May M. Three-dimensional mammography. Am Scientist. 1994;82:421–422. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Kundel HL, Revesz G. Lesion conspicuity, structured noise, and film reader error. AJR. 1976;126:1233–1238. doi: 10.2214/ajr.126.6.1233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Karssemeijer N, Frieling JTM, Hendriks JHCL. Spatial resolution in digital mammography. Invest Radiol. 1993;28:413–419. doi: 10.1097/00004424-199305000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE, et al. Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology. 1997;205:399–406. doi: 10.1148/radiology.205.2.9356620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Webber RL, Horton RA, Tyndall DA, et al. Tuned-aperture computed tomography (TACT). Theory and application for three-dimensional dento-alveolar imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1997;26:53–62. doi: 10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Webber RL, inventor; Wake Forest University, assignee: Self-calibrated tomosynthetic, radiographic-imaging system, method and device. US patent 5,359,637, October 25, 1994
- 9.Webber RL, inventor; Wake Forest University, assignee: Self-calibrated tomosynthetic, radiographic-imaging system, method and device. US patent 5,668,844, September 16, 1997
- 10.Bolmgren J, Jacobson B, Nordenstrom B. Stereotaxic instrument for needle biopsy of the mamma. AJR. 1977;129:121–125. doi: 10.2214/ajr.129.1.121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Ruttimann UE, Gröenhuis RAJ, Webber RL. Restoration of digital multiplane tomosynthesis by a constrained iteration method. IEEE Trans Med Imaging MI. 1984;3:141–148. doi: 10.1109/TMI.1984.4307670. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Webber RL, Underhill HR, Hemler PF, et al. A nonlinear algorithm for task-specific tomosynthetic image reconstruction. In: Dobbins JT, Boone JM, et al., editors. SPIE Medical Imaging 1999: Physics of Medical Imaging. San Diego, CA: SPIE; 1999. pp. 258–265. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Sadowsky NL, Semine A, Harris J. Breast imaging. A critical aspect of breast conserving treatment. Cancer. 1990;65:2113–2118. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19900501)65:9+<2113::AID-CNCR2820651406>3.0.CO;2-N. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]