Physical and dosimetric characterisation of different Contrast-Enhanced digital mammographic systems: A multicentric study.

PURPOSE: Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is a relatively new imaging technique recombining low- and high-energy mammograms to emphasise iodine contrast. This work aims to perform a multicentric physical and dosimetric characterisation of four state-of-the-art CEDM systems. METHODS: We evaluated tube output, half-value-layer (HVL) for low- and high-energy and average glandular dose (AGD) in a wide range of equivalent breast thicknesses. CIRS phantom 022 was used to estimate the overall performance of a CEDM examination in the subtracted image in terms of the iodine difference signal (S). To calculate dosimetric impact of CEDM examination, we collected 4542 acquisitions on patients. RESULTS: Even if CEDM acquisition strategies differ, all the systems presented a linear behaviour between S and iodine concentration. The curve fit slopes expressed in PV/mg/cm2 were in the range [92-97] for Fujifilm, [31-32] for GE Healthcare, [35-36] for Hologic, and [114-130] for IMS. Dosimetric data from patients were matched with AGD values calculated using equivalent PMMA thicknesses. Fujifilm exhibited the lowest values, while GE Healthcare showed the highest. CONCLUSION: The subtracted image showed the ability of all the systems to give important information about the linearity of the signal with the iodine concentrations. All the patient-collected doses were under the AGD EUREF 2D Acceptable limit, except for patients with thicknesses ≤35 mm belonging to GE Healthcare and Hologic, which were slightly over. This work demonstrates the importance of testing each CEDM system to know how it performs regarding dose and the relationship between PV and iodine concentration.

A comparative study of physical image quality in digital and synthetic mammography from commercially available mammography systems.

We present a comparison between full field digital mammography and synthetic mammography, performed on several mammography systems from four different manufacturers. The analysis is carried out on both the digital and synthetic images of two commercially available mammography phantoms, and focuses on a set of objective metrics that encode the geometrical appearance of imaging features of diagnostic interest. In particular, we measured sizes and contrasts of several clusters of microcalcification specks, shapes and contrasts of circular masses, and the power spectrum of background regions mimicking the heterogeneous texture of the breast parenchyma. Despite the potential issues of tomosynthesis in terms of image blurring, the synthetic images do not highlight any globally significant differences in the rendering of the details of interest, when compared to the original digital mammograms: relative contrasts are generally preserved, as well as the geometry of broad structures. We conclude that, as far as the considered objective metrics are concerned, the image quality of synthetic mammography does not exhibit significant differences with respect to the one of full field digital mammography, for all the considered systems.

Patient dose in digital projection radiography.

In projection radiography, two types of digital imaging systems are currently available, computed radiography (CR) and direct radiography (DR): a difference between them can be stated in terms of dose and image quality. In the Radiology Emergency Department of our hospital, a flat-panel DR equipment (Siemens Axiom Aristos FX) and two CR systems (Kodak CR-850) are employed. In 2006, five standard radiographic examinations (abdomen, chest, lumbar spine, pelvis, skull) were considered: doses delivered to patients in terms of both entrance skin dose (ESD) and effective dose (E) were calculated and compared in order to study the dosimetric discrepancies between CR and DR. Assessment of image quality is undertaken by Consultant Radiologists to ensure that the quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images of the European guidelines were met. Results showed that both ESD and E in DR are lower than that in CR; all images met the criteria in the European Guidelines for both modalities and were used for reporting by the radiologists. Since the operators are the same and the image quality is comparable in both modalities, this study shows that in the considered examinations, DR can perform better than CR from a dosimetric point of view.

Effective dose calculations in conventional diagnostic X-ray examinations for adult and paediatric patients in a large Italian hospital.

The effective dose E is an efficient and powerful parameter to study the radioprotection of the patient. In our hospital, eight radiological departments and more than 100 radiological X-ray tubes are present. The effective doses were calculated for adults and paediatric patients in 10 standard projections. To calculate E, first the entrance skin dose (ESD) was evaluated by a mathematical model that was validated by >400 direct measurements taken with an ionisation chamber on four different phantoms: the overall accuracy of the model was better than 12%. Second, to relate ESD to E, conversion coefficients calculated by Monte Carlo techniques were used. The E-values obtained were of the same order as those presented in the literature. Finally, we analysed how the study of E distributions among the various radiological departments can help to optimise the procedures, by identifying the most critical examinations or sub-optimal clinical protocols.

Comparison of six phantoms for entrance skin dose evaluation in 11 standard X-ray examinations.

Entrance skin dose (ESD) is an important parameter for assessing the dose received by a patient in a single radiographic exposure. The most useful way to evaluate ESD is either by direct measurement on phantoms using an ionization chamber or using calculations based on a mathematical model. We compared six phantoms (three anthropomorphic, two physical, and one mathematical) in 11 standard clinical examinations (anterior-posterior (AP) abdomen, posterior-anterior (PA) chest, AP chest, lateral (LAT) chest, AP lumbar spine, LAT lumbar spine, LAT lumbo-sacral joint, AP pelvis, PA skull, LAT skull, and AP urinary tract) for two reasons: to determine the conversion factors to use for ESDs measured on different phantoms and to validate the mathematical model used. First, a comparison was done between the three anthropomorphic phantoms (Alderson Rando, chest RSD-77SPL, and 3M skull) and the two physical phantoms (Uniform and AAPM 31); for each examination we obtained "relative entrance skin dose factors." Second, we compared these five phantoms with the mathematical phantom: the overall accuracy of the model was better than 14%. Total mathematical model and total ionization chamber uncertainties, calculated by quadratic propagation of errors of the single components, were estimated to be on the order of +/-12% and +/-3%, respectively. To reduce the most significant source of uncertainty, the overall accuracy of the model was recalculated using new backscatter factors. The overall accuracy of the model improved: better than 12%. For each examination an anthropomorphic phantom was considered as the gold standard relative to the physical phantoms. In this way, it was possible to analyze the variations in phantom design and characteristics. Finally, the mathematical model was validated by more than 400 measurements taken on different phantoms and using a variety of radiological equipment. We conclude that the mathematical model can be used satisfactorily in ESD evaluations because it optimizes available resources, it is based on direct measurements, and it is an easy dynamic tool.

Local diagnostic reference levels in standard X-ray examinations.

The national diagnostic reference levels (NDRLs) form an efficient, concise and powerful standard for optimising radiation protection of a patient. However, in a large hospital, where many radiological departments are present, it is also possible to calculate and define lower dose values as local diagnostic reference levels (LDRLs). In our hospital there are eight radiological departments; in each of these, the entrance skin dose (ESD) distributions were determined for 10 standard projections (AP Abdomen, PA and LAT Chest, AP and LAT Lumbar Spine, LAT Lumbo-Sacral Joint, AP Pelvis, PA and LAT Skull and AP Urinary tract) and then the ESDs were compared with data previously published and with Italian NDRLs. All ESD values were below the corresponding NDRLs. The maximum/minimum ratio of ESDs ranged from 3.9 (LAT Skull) to 34.3 (AP Abdomen) for individual adult patients and from 2.1 (PA Skull) to 6.5 (Urinary tract) across the mean values of the radiological departments. Finally, it is shown how LDRLs can be proposed to obtain a more fully optimised radiation protection of patients.