Powerpoint

Digital vs Film Screen Mammography

You must be logged in to download this document
Reviews
Shared by: sammyc2007
Categories
Stats
views:
301
rating:
not rated
reviews:
0
posted:
4/24/2008
language:
English
pages:
0
DIGITAL vs. FILM-SCREEN MAMMOGRAPHY by EDWARD L. NICKOLOFF, D.Sc. DEPARTMENT OF RADIOLOGY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY NEW YORK, N.Y. 10032 GOALS • COMPARE THE VARIOUS DIGITAL SYSTEMS TO FILM-SCREEN SYSTEMS • DETERMINE SOME KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SYSTEMS: IMAGE QUALITY, RADIATION DOSES, OPERATIONAL FEATURES & PHYSICS TESTING ISSUES • IDENTIFY ADVANTAGES & DIS-ADVANTAGES OF EACH MAMMOGRAPHY SYSTEM THE EQUIPMENT GE 2000-D DIGITAL GE DMR FILMSCREEN THE EQUIPMENT LORAD CCD DIGITAL -SELENIA SIMILAR LORAD M IV PLATINUM FILM-SCREEN Fischer Imaging SenoScan FFDM System DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY DETECTORS GE 2000-D IGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY UNIT Contact Leads For Read-Out Electronics Contact Fingers Amorphous Silicon Array Scintillator (CsI) Glass Substrate FROM GE LORAD CCD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY UNIT CARBON FIBER RECEPTOR SURFACE CsI SCINTILLATOR 40 m LIGHT PIPE LIGHT PIPE LIGHT PIPE 10 m CCD CCD CIRCUIT BOARD AMORPHOUS SELENIUM DETECTORS AMORPHOUS SELENIUM DETECTOR READOUT VOLTAGE -- -- IONIZATION DETECTOR ASSEMBLY MOVES IN AN ARC Cesium Iodide CsI SCINTILLATOR Fiber Optic Plate 4 CCD’s Fischer Imaging Corporation WORK LOAD EFFICIENCY COMPARISON Digital Mammography - Productivity Conventional Exam With Film 1:30 Patient in Room First Exposure 4:45 Last Exposure 2:15 First Film Out of Processor 8% Repeat Rate :05 Last Film Out of Processor :10 QC :30 Release Patient 12:10 min Exam Using Digital Detector 1:30 Patient in Room First Exposure & QC 1:45 Last Exposure & QC :45 Release Patient / Send Study To WS 4:00 min Minimal Repeats Estimated > 60% Reduction In Exam Times From GE MY EFFICIENCY ESTIMATE • FILM-SCREEN SYSTEMS – TALK WITH PATIENT & POSITION FOR 4 FILMS = 6 MINUTES – MARK CASSETTES WITH I.D. & BAR CODE STUDY = 1 MINUTES – WALK TO PROCESSOR WITH CASSETTES = 2 MINUTES – INSERT CASSETTES IN DAYLIGHT LOADER COUPLED TO PROCESSOR & WAIT FOR PROCESSED FILMS = 7 MINUTES – QC FILM & PLACE IN JACKET = 1 MINUTES – TALK TO PATIENT, RADIOLOGIST AND WAIT TO DRESS & LEAVE = 2 – 4 MINUTES • TOTAL = 20 MINUTES MY EFFICIENY ESTIMATE • DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY – TALK WITH PATIENT & POSITION FOR 4 IMAGES = 6 MINUTES – KEY IN COMPUTER INFORMATION & I.D. & BAR CODE STUDY = 2 MINUTES – REVIEW IMAGES AND TRANSMIT TO RADIOLOGIST REVIEW STATION = 2 MINUTES – TALK TO PATIENT, RADIOLOGIST AND WAIT TO DRESS & LEAVE = 2 - 4 MINUTES • TOTAL = 13 MINUTES COMMENTS ON RELATIVE EFFICIENCY • ONE DIGITAL MAMMO CAN EASILY REPLACE TWO FILM-SCREEN MAMMO UNITS • ROUTINE RT QC IS BETTER … IN COMPUTER • FEW DRIFTS WITH DIGITAL UNIT • FEWER REPEATS WITH DIGITAL UNIT RADIATION DOSES FOR MAMMOGRAPHY UNITS COMPARISON OF RADIATION DOSES (GE DMR FILM-SCREEN vs. GE 2000-D DIGITAL) 400 AVERAGE GLANDUALAR DOSE (mRADS) 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2 3 4 5 6 THICKNESS OF BR-12 (cm) DIGITAL AOP STANDARD FILM AoP STANDARD 7 DIGITAL AoP CONTRAST FILM AoP CONTRAST DIGITAL AoP DOSE FILM AoP DOSE COMPARISON OF RADIATION DOSES (LORAD FILM-SCREEN WITH DIGITAL) 600 AVERAGE GLANDUALAR DOSE (mRADS) 500 400 300 200 100 0 2 3 4 5 6 THICKNESS OF BR-12 (cm) 7 8 CCD DIGITAL AT 28 kVp FILM AUTO-FILTER 200 mAs LIMIT FILM AUTO-TIME CCD DIGITAL WITH kVp ADJUST FILM AUTO-kVp AUTO-mAs LORAD SELENIA DIGITAL SUMMARY OF MAMMO DOSES • IN GENERAL, THE RADIATION DOSE FOR FILM-SCREEN & DIGITAL MODES WERE SIMILAR • HOWEVER, DIGITAL DETECTORS ARE VERY EFFICIENT EVEN WITH HIGH ENERGY XRAYS... SO HIGHER KVP’s AND FILTRATION WERE USED.... RESULTING IN SLIGHTLY LOWER RAD DOSES • FILM CONTRAST MODES DELIVERED MORE RAD DOSE BECAUSE IT USED LOWER KVP’S SUMMARY OF RADIATION DOSES • BEWARE, UNLIKE FILM-SCREEN, DIGITAL DETECTORS CAN OPERATE OVER A WIDE RANGE OF RAD DOSES & NOISE IMPROVES AT HIGHER DOSES • DIGITAL IMAGES WITH HIGHER RADIATION DOSES LOOK BETTER • PHYSICISTS MUST GUARD AGAINST ABUSE !! GOALS OF AUTO AEC SYSTEMS • UTILIZE EXPOSURE TIMES <2.5 SEC • UTILIZE Dg < 300 mrads FOR < 4.2 cm COMPRESSED BREAST THICKNESS • INCREASE Dg < 150 mrads @ +1 cm • USE HIGHER kVp’S FOR THICKER / DENSE BREASTS • MAINTAIN “ESE” < 10,000 mR • IF AVAILABLE, USE Rh ANODE AND/OR FILTER FOR THICKER / DENSE BREASTS AUTOMATED AEC SYSTEMS • USE DYNAMIC MEASUREMENTS DURING AN EXPOSURE TO SET PARAMETERS – ANODE – FILTER – kVp – mAs • INVOLVES LOOK-UP TABLES (LUT) BASED UPON PATIENT BREAST TECHNIQUES BASED UPON AVERAGE GLANDULAR DOSE MEASUREMENTS IN BR-12 CO M PR ES SED BR E AS T THIC K NES S (C M ) X -R AY TU B E P O TEN TIAL (kV p) < 3 3 - 4 4 - 5 5 - 6 6 - 7 7 - 8 25 26 27 28 29 31 - 26 27 28 29 30 32 COMPARISON OF kVp & ANODE / FILTER FOR FILM-SCREEN vs. DIGITAL GE MAMMO IN AoP CONTRAST MODE 35 kVp UTILIZED 30 25 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 THICKNESS OF BR-12 (cm) FILM Mo/Mo DIGITAL Mo/Mo FILM Mo/Rh DIGITAL Mo/Rh FILM Rh/Rh DIGITAL Rh/Rh COMPARISON OF RADIATION DOSES (GE DMR FILM-SCREEN vs. GE 2000-D DIGITAL ) 500 450 AVERAGE GRANDULAR DOSE (mRADS) 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2 3 4 5 6 THICKNESS OF BR-12 (cm) DIGITAL AoP CONTRAST FILM AoP CONTRAST 7 8 COMPARISON OF kVp & ANODE / FILTER FOR FILM vs. DIGITAL GE IN AoP STANDARD 34 32 kVp UTILIZED 30 28 26 24 22 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 THICKNESS BR-12 (cm) FILM Mo/Rh DIGITAL Mo/Rh 6 7 8 FILM Mo/Mo DIGITAL Mo/Mo FILM Rh/Rh DIGITAL Rh/Rh COMPARISON OF RADIATION DOSE (GE DMR FILM-SCREEN vs. GE 2000-D DIGITAL) 450 AVERAGE GLANDULAR DOSE (mrads) 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2 3 4 5 6 PHANTOM THICKNESS (cm) 7 8 DIGITAL AOP STANDARD FILM AoP STANDARD AutoCell: Breast w/Photo Cells DDD Digital vs FilmScreen SUMMARY OF AEC SYSTEMS • DIGITAL SYSTEMS USE HIGHER kVp’S THAN FILM-SCREEN SYSTEMS • DIGITAL SYSTEMS USE ANODE / FILTERS WHICH PROVIDE HIGHER ENERGY XRAYS • DIGITAL SYSTEM ARE MORE FLEXIBLE WITH AEC SENSOR AREA • DIGITAL SYSTEM ARE EXPECTED TO BE SLIGHTLY LESS DOSE • DIGTIAL SYSTEMS CAN BE ADJUSTED FOR A RANGE OF DOSES HIGH CONTRAST SPATIAL RESOLUTION WHAT AFFECTS HIGH CONTRAST SPATIAL RESOLUTION? • X-RAY TUBE FOCAL SPOT SIZE – DIMENSION – GEOMETRY … MAGNIFICATION, SID – L = M / [ (M -1) x f ] – INTENSITY DISTRIBUTION • IMAGE RECEPTOR INHERENT LIMITS – FILM-SCREEN – DIGITAL SYSTEM CONTACT FILM-SCREEN MAMMOGRAPHY SPATIAL RESOLUTION AS A FUNCTION OF BREAST THICKNESS & FOCAL SPOT SIZE 25 OVERALL SPATIAL RESOLUTION (LP/mm) 20 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 BREAST THICKNESS (CM) F=0.3 mmf=0.6mm f=0.6 mm f=1.2 mm 1.5x MAG FILM-SCREEN MAMMOGRAPHY SPATIAL RESOLUTION AS A FUNCTION OF BREAST THICKNESS & FOCAL SPOT SIZE 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 BREAST THICKNESS (CM) F=0.1 mm f=0.3 mm f=0.6 mm OVERALL SPATIAL RESOLUTION (LP/mm) 6 CONTACT DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY SPATIAL RESOLUTION AS A FUNCTION OF BREAST THICKNESS & FOCAL SPOT SIZE OVERALL SPATIAL RESOLUTION (LP/mm) 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 F=0.3 mm 3 4 5 6 7 BREAST THICKNESS (cm) f=0.6 mm 8 9 10 f=1.2 mm 1.5x MAG DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY SPATIAL RESOLUTION AS A FUNCTION OF BREAST THICKNESS & FOCAL SPOT SIZE 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 OVERALL SPATIAL RESOLUTION (LP/mm) 0 1 2 F=0.1 3 4 5 6 7 8 BREAST THICKNESS (cm) F=0.3 9 F=0.6 10 PIN-HOLE CAMERA OF X-RAY FOCAL SPOT HIGH CONTRAST SPATIAL RESOLUTION (GE DMR FILM-SCREEN vs GE 2000-D DIGITAL) 18 SPATIAL RESOLUTION (LP/mm) 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PHANTOM THICKNESS (cm) DIGITAL MEASURED THEORY FILM-SCREEN FILM MEASURED THEORY DIGITAL HIGH CONTRAST SPATIAL RESOLUTION (LORAD MIV PLATINUM FILM-SCREEN vs LORAD CCD & SELENIA DIGITAL) 18 SPATIAL RESOLUTION (LP/mm) 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 PHANTOM THICKNESS (cm) CCD DIGITAL MEASURED THEORY FILM-SCREEN SELENIA DIGITAL MEASURED FILM MEASURED THEORY CCD DIGITAL THEORY SELENIA DIGITAL SUMMARY OF HIGH CONTRAST SPATIAL RESOLUTION • DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY UNITS HAVE LOWER SPATIAL RESOLUTION THAN THE FILM SCREEN UNITS ( 5 – 8 LP/mm) • MEASURED DIGITAL RESOLUTION WAS 30% TO 60% OF FILM-SCREEN RESOLUTION (15 – 20 LP/mm) • SPATIAL RESOLUTION DOES NOT TELL THE WHOLE STORY! Flat Panel-Light Sensor scan line FET Very High Fill Factor Fill Factor= Sensitive Area Pitch x Pitch data line Pitch FROM GE Pitch IMAGE RECEPTOR DEPENDENCE • FILM-SCREEN SYSTEMS – DESIGN OF SCREEN (THICKNESS, DYES, REFLECTIVE LAYER, PHOSPHOR CRYSTALS) – TYPICALLY….. 15 TO 25 LP/mm • DIGITAL SYSTEMS – PITCH ( 25m To 100m ) – L = 1 / (2 x PITCH) – TYPICALLY …… 5 TO 10 LP/mm LOW CONTRAST DETECTABILITY LOW CONTRAST DETECTABILITY RMI 180 C-D PHANTOM • NINE HOLE DEPTHS RANGE FROM 0.062 mm TO 1.0 mm • SUBJECT CONTRAST = EXP (-m T) • TEN HOLE DIAMETERS RANGE FROM 0.312 mm TO 7.07 mm COMPARISON OF LOW CONTRAST DETECTION OF FILM-SCREEN vs. DIGITAL MAMMO SYSTEMS ---- GE 100 % 0F LOW CONTRAST TARGET VISUALIZED (%) 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 2 4 6 8 ACRYLIC THICKNESS OF PHANTOM (cm) GE 2000-D DIGITAL Linear (GE 2000-D DIGITAL) GE DMR+FILM Linear (GE DMR+FILM) 10 COMPARISON OF LOW CONTRAST DETECTION OF FILM-SCREEN vs. DIGITAL MAMMO SYSTEMS --- LORAD 100 % OF LOW CONTRAST TARGET VISUALIZED (%) 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 2 4 6 8 ACRYLIC THICKNESSOF PHANTOM (cm) LORAD CCD DIGITAL Linear (LORAD CCD DIGITAL) Linear (LORAD SELENIA DIGITAL) 10 LORAD MIV + FILM LORAD SELENIA DIGITAL Linear (LORAD MIV + FILM) DIGITAL SYSTEM SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO (SNR) DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY SYSTEMS SNR vs. RADIATION EXPOSURE 1000 SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO (SNR) y = 12.216x 100 0.5374 y = 9.759x 10 0.5552 1 0.1 1 LORAD DIGITAL Power (LORAD DIGITAL) 10 100 GE 2000-D DIGITAL Power (GE 2000-D DIGITAL) 1000 ENTRANCE RADIATION EXPOSURE (mR) OTHER CONSIDERATIONS DYNAMIC RANGE CONSIDERATIONS FILM-SCREEN CHARACTERISTIC CURVE -GE DMR WITH KODAK MIN-R 2000 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 LOG [EXPOSURE (mR)] USEFUL RANGE = 78.9 mR / 8.9 mR = 8.7 28 kVp, 3 cm ACRYLIC, INTO BUCKY KODAK 270 RA PROCESSOR WITH KODAK CHEMISTRY FILM DYNAMIC RANGE FILM DENSITY [O.D.] FILM-SCREEN CONTRAST GRADIENT -GE DMR WITH KODAK MIN-R 2000 FILM 4.5 4 FILM CONTRAST GRADIENT 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 FILM OPTICAL DENSITY (O.D.) FILM-SCREEN DYNAMIC DYNAMIC RANGE OF DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY -- GE 2000-D DIGITAL 10000 RELATIVE DIGITAL SIGNAL DIGITAL DYNAMIC RANGE 1000 100 USEFUL RANGE = > 260 mR / 0.1 mR = > 2600 10 1 0.1 1 10 100 1000 ENTRANCE EXPOSURE ( mR)] LORAD 2000 DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY: SIGNAL vs RADIATION EXPOSURE 100000 DIGITAL DYNAMIC RANGE SIGNAL (relative units) 10000 1000 100 USEFUL RANGE = 130 mR / 0.1 mR = 1300 10 1 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 ENTRANCE EXPOSURE (mR) TISSUE EQUALIZATIONS Thickness Compensation GOAL: EQUALIZATION OF DENSITIES TO SKIN LINE. Algorithm: 1. Estimate the thickness of the breast at all pixels 2. Add a nearly-equivalent thickness [of water] to raise gray level. Line-Profile through Breast Original TC-Processed Compensation Thickness Breast Thickness { { FROM GE Breast 3 RMLO no TE FROM GE Breast 3 - RMLO TISSUE EQUILIZATION COMPUTERS IN MAMMOGRAPHY • • • • • • Computer Aided Diagnosis (CAD) Data Compression PACS Image Enhancement Dual Energy Subtraction Tomosynthesis COMPUTER AIDED DIAGNOSIS FROM : L CLARKE et al., Acad. Radiol. 1997 GE C ompany Proprietary - Not for External Distribution October 6, 1998 COMPUTER-AIDED DETECTION Applications • Automated detection • Automated classification TM Current ImageCheckerTM Performance • Flagged 85% of overlooked cancers • Flagged 83% of diagnosed cancers Increase the sensitivity for cancer detection when combined with the radiologist From GE DISPLAY MONITORS VDT verses VIEWBOX • BRIGHTNESS – VDT = 200 TO 400 LUX – VIEWBOX = 3000 - 4000 LUX • VDT HAS WINDOWS & LEVELS FOR VARIABLE CONTRAST / BRIGHTNESS • COLOR TINT DIFFERENCES • CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS & DRIFT MONITOR CHARACTERISTICS THE SMPTE TEST PATTERN WITH 13 SHADES OF GRAYSCALE PATCHES WAS UTILIZED TO MEASURE THE GRAYSCALE “LUT “. SMPTE TEST PATTERN VISIBILITY OF BARS EACH SHADE OF GRAY BLOCK DIFFERENT LINES STRAIGHT 0% / 5% CONTRAST BLOCK VISIBLE 100% / 95% CONTRAST BLOCK VISIBLE IMAGE MANIPULATION LMLO - Full Zoom, no Invert FROM GE LMLO - Full Zoom, Invert FROM GE UNSHARP MASK ENHANCEMENT DENSITY DENSITY ORIGINAL SMOOTH DISTANCE DISTANCE DENSITY ORIGINAL - SMOOTH DENSITY ORIGINAL + 4 DIFFERENCE DISTANCE DISTANCE Tomosynthesis Series of low-dose images used to reconstruct tomography images at any level FROM GE ADVANTAGES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY • LARGE DYNAMIC RANGE -- NOT TOO DARK OR TOO LIGHT • WINDOW & LEVEL CAPABILITY • IMAGE PROCESSING • FAST RETREIVAL & LAYOUT • LOWER REPEAT RATES • LESS PATIENT RADIATION DOSE • COMPUTER AIDED DIAGNOSIS (CAD) • TELERADIOLOGY CAPABILITY ADVANTAGES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY • BETTER SENSITIVITY & EARLY DETECTION • COMBINE WITH RIS/HIS DISPLAY • COMPACT IMAGE STORAGE • BETTER PATIENT TRACKING & BILLING • SERVICES TO REMOTE LOCATIONS • LATITUDE & CONTRAST DIS-ADVANTAGES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY • • • • • HIGH INITIAL COSTS HIGHER MAINTENANCE COSTS TECHNOLOGY OBSOLENCE ISSUES HIGH QUALITY SUPPORT PERSONNEL NEED FOR NETWORK & NETWORK SUPPORT • LOWER SPATIAL RESOLUTION • NETWORK TRANSFER SPEED LIMITS • MORE COMPLEX VIEWING PROCESS DIS-ADVANTAGES OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY • ENTERING INCORRECT ID# CAN MISPLACE STUDIES & BILLING • PACS/NEMA COMPATABLE HARDWARE MAY NOT BE INSTALLED • INTRA-VENDOR COMPATABILITY • POWER / COMPONENT FAILURES • LONG-TERM DATA RETRIEVAL DELAYS • LACK OF INSTANT FLUORO REVIEW CONCLUSIONS • DIGITAL IS MORE TIME EFFICIENT • RAD DOSE CAN BE SIMILAR • FILM-SCREEN HAS BETTER HIGH CONTRAST RESOLUTION & DIGITAL BETTER LOW CONTRAST SENSITIVITY • DIGITAL MAMMO SYSTEMS ARE MORE ROBUST: – WIDER DYNAMIC RANGE – WINDOW / LEVEL ADJUSTMENT – COMPUTER IMAGE ENHANCEMENT ARRET

Related docs
Digital vs
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
DICOM Digital Mammography Subgroup
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
Digital Mammography with CAD
Views: 12  |  Downloads: 0
Digital Xray Mammography
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Implementing Digital Mammography in your Facility
Views: 247  |  Downloads: 10
MQSA and Full Field Digital Mammography
Views: 852  |  Downloads: 15
MQSA and Full Field Digital Mammography
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Section 12 - Mammography
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Breast Caner Screening Mammography
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
premium docs
Other docs by sammyc2007
What are the indications for intubation
Views: 338  |  Downloads: 13
VENTILATORY MANAGEMENT ENDOTRACHEAL INTUBATION
Views: 120  |  Downloads: 4
The Neonatal Airway and Neonatal Intubation
Views: 276  |  Downloads: 12
The Airway and Intubation
Views: 193  |  Downloads: 15
RSI RAPID SEQUENCE INTUBATION
Views: 286  |  Downloads: 6
Rapid Sequence Intubation The Role of the NH
Views: 122  |  Downloads: 2
PROTOCOL POST INTUBATION MANAGEMENT
Views: 141  |  Downloads: 4
PEDIATRIC INTUBATION POLICY AND PROCEDURE
Views: 165  |  Downloads: 1
Pediatric Airway Management
Views: 133  |  Downloads: 9
Pediatric Airway Emergencies
Views: 88  |  Downloads: 10
Non invasive ventilation and LV dysfunction
Views: 65  |  Downloads: 2
NASOGASTRIC INTUBATION
Views: 168  |  Downloads: 7
Mechanical Ventilation for Nursing
Views: 316  |  Downloads: 16
Management of the Routine Pediatric Airway
Views: 92  |  Downloads: 2