Digital Mammography: IWDM 2002 — 6th International Workshop on Digital Mammography PDF
Preview Digital Mammography: IWDM 2002 — 6th International Workshop on Digital Mammography
Digital Mammography IWDM2002 6thInternationalWorkshop onDigital Mammography Springer Berlin Heidelberg NewYork HongKong London Milan Paris Tokyo Heinz-Otto Peitgen Editor Digital Mammography IWDM 2002 6th International Workshop on Digital Mammography Proceedings ofthe Workshop June 22-25,2002, Bremen, Germany , Springer Heinz-OttoPeitgen,Ph.D. ProfessorofMathematicsandBiomedicalSciences MeVis- CenterforMedicalDiagnosticSystemsandVisualization attheUniversityofBremen Universitatsallee29 28359Bremen,Germany With282figuresand78tables ISBN-l3:978-3-642-63936-4 e-ISBN-13:978-3-<i42-59327-7 DOl:10.1007/978-3-<)42-59327-7 Cataloging-in-PublicationDataappliedfor BibliographicinformationpublishedbyDieDeutscheBibliothek DieDeutscheBibliothekliststhispublicationintheDeutscheNationalbibliografie;detailedbibliographicdataisavail ableintheInternetat<http://dnb.ddb.de> Thiswork issubjecttocopyright.All rightsarereserved.whetherthewholeorpartofthe materialisconcerned. specifically the rights of translation. reprinting. reuse of illustrations. recitation. broadcasting. reproduction on microfilmorinanyotherway.andstorageindatabanks.Duplicationofthispublicationorpartsthereofispermitted onlyundertheprovisionsoftheGermanCopyrightLawofSeptember9.1965,initscurrentversion.andpermissionfor usemustalwaysbeobtainedfromSpringer-Verlag.ViolationsareliableforprosecutionundertheGermanCopyright Law. Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelbergNewYork amemberofBertelsmannSpringerScience+BusinessMediaGmbH http://www.springer.de ©Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2003 Softcoverreprintofthehardcover1stedition2003 Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames.trademarks.etc.inthispublicationdoesnotimply.eveninthe absenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfrom therelevant protectivelawsandregulations and thereforefreeforgeneraluse. Cover-Design:design&productionGmbH,Heidelberg Typsetting:Camera-readybyeditor Printedonacidfreepaper 2113150HS - 5 4 3 2 1 0 Preface This book comprises the scientific proceedings of the International Workshop on Digital Mammography (IWDM), held in Bremen, Germany, from June 22 to June 25, 2002. Since its inception in 1992, IWDM has grown into the In ternational Forum on Digital Mammography. The uniqueness of IWDM is its attractiveness to researchers, medical practitioners, and industrial developers. F6rmer workshops were held in San Jose, USA (1992), York, UK (1994), Chicago, USA (1996), Nijmegen, NL (1998), and Toronto, Canada (2000). Each of these scientific events has been combined with very successful and focused industrial and research exhibits, which demonstrated the milestones of digital mammography hard- and software. Now, that digital mammography is entering routine clinical use, we witness its strong impact on screening and diagnostic mammography, computer aided detection, minimally invasive procedures, and the development ofsystemic and integrated disease- oriented breast care. In view ofthis, the 2002 workshop pro vided a window to give us a glance at the future, and the work which was presented in talks, posters and exhibits has demonstrated that IWDM2002 will take a special place in the very successful sequence ofIWDM events. Finally, asconference chair, I would liketo thank all who have helped to pre pare and run IWDM2002: the Scientific Advisory Board for itsexcellent work in guaranteeingscientificsignificance,theOrganizationalBoardfor itshardworkto accomplishanappropriateframework for theevent, and the industrialexhibitors and sponsors for their generous support. Bremen, January 2003 Heinz-Otto Peitgen Conference Chair Professor of Mathematics and Biomedical Sciences VI Scientific Committee Susan Astley University ofManchester, UK Ulrich Bick Charit Berlin, Germany/University ofChicago, USA Michael Brady Oxford University, UK Hiroshi Fujita Gifu University, Japan Maryellen Giger University ofChicago, USA Nico Karssemeijer University Hospital Nijmegen, The Netherlands Heinz-Otto PeitgenUniversity ofBremen, Germany Etta D. Pisano University ofNorth Carolina, USA Martin Yaffe University ofToronto, Canada IWDM 2002 was supported by (MeViS SIEMENS BreastCare medical I' GeneralElectric ARC-0 Fllmle..Perfectionfor DI I JMammography Table of Contents Imaging Systems and Detectors ........................... 1 Digital Mammographic Application ofa Single Photon Counting Pixel Detector. ..... .. .... .... ...... .. ........ ......... .. .............. 3 Amendolia SR, Bisogni MG, Delogu P, Fantacci ME, Novelli M, Quattrocchi M, Rosso V, Stefanini A, Zucca S Breast Cancer Screening Using a Dedicated Breast CT Scanner: A Feasibility Study. ................................................. 6 Boone JM, Lindfors KK, Seibert JA, Nelson TR Physical Evaluation of a Prototype for the Sectra Microdose Mammography System. .. ...... .. ...... ... ...... .. ................ 12 Lundqvist M, Bergstrom D, Cederstrom B, Chmill V, Chuntonov A, Danielsson M, Aslund M Dose Measurements on a Scanning Multi-slit Digital Mammography System.......................................................... 17 Hansson B, Cederstrom B, Danielsson M, Aslund M Digital Mammography vs. to Screen-Film Mammography: a Phantom Study........................................................... 20 Heid P, Pagliuchi C, Seradour B, Motte N, Langlois L, Kurkdjian S, Piana L Mammography Taxonomy for Improvement ofLesion Detection Rates ... 27 Howard D, Roberts SC, Tabar L A High Resolution (25 p.m) Hybrid Selenium/CCD Slot Scan Detector for Digital Mammography. ......................................... 33 Hunter DM, De Crescenzo G, Mainprize JG, Mawdsley GE, Smith C, Kasap SO, Rowlands JAR, Tumer T, Yin S, Yaffe MJ Co-registered Breast Imaging with 3D X-Rays and 3D Ultrasound. ..... 38 Kapur A, Eberhard JW, Abdalmajeid AM, Thomenius K Imaging Characteristics of a Direct Conversion Full-Field Digital Mammography Detector using Selenium. ............................ 43 Lee DL, Yorker lG, ling Z, leromin LS Simultaneous Acquisition ofDiffraction, Scattering and Phase-Contrast Images by Means of a Multi-Layer Edge-On Microstrip Detector 48 Olivo A, Arfelli P, Bergamaschi A, Dreossi D, Longo R, Menk RH, Montanari F, Pani S, Poropat P, Rigon L, Vallazza E, Castelli E VIII Full Field Digital Mammography with a CCD Based Slot-Scanned Detector. Physical Characteristics Measurements. ..................... 51 Tahoces PC, Nishikawa RM Evaluation ofLight Collection in Digital Indirect Detection X-Ray Imagers: Monte Carlo Simulations with a More Realistic Phosphor Screen Model. .................................................... 54 Petrick N, Woo TH, Ghan HP, Sahiner B, Hadjiiski LM The Effect ofScatter Radiation and its Removal on the DQE ofDigital Mammography Systems. ........................................... 59 Nishikawa RM Finding CLS Using a Multiresolution Oriented Local Energy Feature Detection ........................................................ 64 Schenk VUB, Brady JM Characterization of an FFDM Unit Based on a-Se Direct Conversion Detector ......................................................... 69 Albanese A, Bevilacqua A, Gampanini R, Iampieri E, Lanconelli N, Rossi M, Romani D, Salomoni V, Vignoli P Comparison of Noise Characteristics Between CR System and Full Field Digital Mammography System. ................................ 72 Kobayashi H, Tanigoshi M, Suzuki T, Uchiyama N Physical Factors Affecting the Detection of Calcifications in Digital Mammography 75 Shaw GG, Liu X, Kappadath SJ, Lai GJ, Rong X, Whitman G Image Quality. .. .. ... ... .... ........ .... .... .. ...... .... ..... 79 A First Experience ofQuality Control in Full Field Digital Mammography 81 Baldelli P, di Maggio G, Gambaccini M, Gennaro G, Taibi A Acceptance Testing of Digital Mammography Units for the ACRINjDMIST Study 85 Bloomquist AK, Bright S, Shen SZ, Mawdsley GE, Yaffe MJ Evaluation and Modelling ofDetection, Location and Discrimination of Lesions in Mammograms. .......................................... 90 Burgess AE, Jacobson FL, Judy PF Effect of Detector Noise on Phantom Image Quality in a Number of FFDM Systems. .................................................. 95 Ghakrabarti K, Kaczmarek RV, Thomas JA, Mahesh M IX Features Analysis Comparison ofCharge-Coupled Device (CCD) and Amorphous Selenium* (aSe) Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM) Systems 100 Gray lE, ling Z, Fajardo LL, Kopans DB, Levit B, Moore RH Comparison of Screen-Film, Imaging Plate and Direct Digital Mammography With CD Phantoms. ................................ 105 Hemdal B, Bay TH, Bengtsson G, Gangeskar L, Martinsen AC, Pedersen K, Thilander Klang A, Mattsson S OptimizingFull-FieldDigital MammographyTechniques: TheInfluence ofTarget-Filter and Peak Voltage Settings on Lesion Detection and Average Glandular Dose. .......................................... 108 Hermann KP, Obenauer S, Funke M, Grabbe E A New CR Based System for High Resolution Mammography: Experimental Analysis ofLow Contrast Detectability .................. 111 Hermann KP, Obenauer S, Zach-Enk A, Grabbe E Digital Luminescence Mammography (CR) Without Magnification In Clinical Routine (n=1.363) ......................................... 114 Schulz-Wendtland RWS, Aichinger U, Kuchar I, Tartsch M, Bautz W Digital Luminescence Mammography: A Phantom Study Before Clinical Use. ..................................................... 118 Schulz-Wendtland RWS, Aichinger U, BohnerC, Dobritz M, Tartsch M, Bautz W Interpreting System MTF and NPS Measured on Clinical Digital Mammography Systems. ........................................... 123 Shen SZ, Mawdsley GE, Bloomquist AK, Mainprize lG, Yaffe Ml Automated Methodfor MeasuringContrast-to-Noise-Ratio (CNR) and Signal-to-Noise-Ratio (SNR) on a Full Field Digital Mammography System (FFDMS) ................................................. 128 Thomas lA, Chakrabarti K, Kaczmarek RV, Romanyukna A Interpretation of Contrast Detail Images in Digital Mammography: Human Observer versus Computer Detection. ........................ 133 Bijkerk KR, Oostveen Ll, Van Engen RE, Swinkels MMl, Veldkamp WlH Automated scoring for CD-MAM phantom on digital mammography. ... 136 Ci%lo C, Muller S, Peter G, Noel A, Stines 1 Comparison ofExperimental and Theoretical Assessments of Detail Visibility in Digital Mammography. ................................. 139 Dance DR, Hunt RA, Sajewicz A, Huda W, Ogden KM, Sandborg M, Aim Carlsson G x Comparison of Objective and Subjective Methods to Assess Imaging Performance in Digital Mammography. .............................. 142 Huda W, Ogden KM, Sajewicz A, Dance DR, Scalzetti EM Dose Reduction in Full-Field Digital Mammography - An Anthropomorphic Breast Phantom Study. ........................... 145 Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E Evaluation of the Exposure Dose Reduction in Full-Field Digital Mammography System '" ..... .. ............. 149 Tanigoshi M, Kobayashi H, Uchiyama N, Suzuki T, Kumazaki T Optimization ofDigital Subtraction Mammography using Monte Carlo Simulation ofthe Imaging Chain , 152 Ullman G, Sandborg M, Dance DR, Skarpathiotakis M, Yaffe MJ, Alm Carlsson G Image Quality ofa Dual Side Reading Fuji Computed Mammography System Compared to the GE FFDM System and a Film/Screen Mammography System " ,.. ...... .. .... ..... 155 Van Engen RE, Veldkamp WJH, Oostveen LJ, Thijssen MAO, Karssemeijer N Image Processing and Display ............................. 159 An Automatic Scheme to Breast Region Segmentation. ................ 161 Adel M, Rasigni M, Rasigni G, Seradour B, Heid P A Universal Segmentation Platform for Computer-Aided Detection ..... 164 Allen B, Oxley M, Collins M Improved Aids For Image Comparison. .............................. 169 Ancelin B, Highnam RP, Brady JM Film-Screen Artefact Detection in Mammograms 174 Ancelin B, Yam M, Highnam RP, Brady JM Learning the Optimal Contrast Enhancement ofMammographic Breast Masses 179 Bovis KJ, Singh S Automatic Evaluation ofMammographic Adequacy and Quality on the Mediolateral Oblique View. ........................................ 182 Chandrasekhar R, Kwok SM, Attikiouzel Y Peripheral Thickness Correction for Volumetric Breast Density Estimation 187 Rico D, Yang J, Augustine B, Mawdsley GE, Yaffe MJ An Adaptive Enhancement Filter For Mammographic Phantom Image. .. 192 Guis V, Adel M, Rasigni M, Rasigni G, Seradour B, Heid P
The list of books you might like
