A comparative study of limited-angle cone-beam reconstruction methods for breast tomosynthesis

被引:239
作者
Zhang, Yiheng [1 ]
Chan, Heang-Ping [1 ]
Sahiner, Berkman [1 ]
Wei, Jun [1 ]
Goodsitt, Mitchell M. [1 ]
Hadjiiski, Lubomir M. [1 ]
Ge, Jun [1 ]
Zhou, Chuan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
digital tomosynthesis mammography (DTM); limited-angle cone-beam tomography; simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique (SART); maximum likelihood method with convex algorithm (ML-convex);
D O I
10.1118/1.2237543
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Digital tomosynthesis mammography (DTM) is a promising new modality for breast cancer detection. In DTM, projection-view images are acquired at a limited number of angles over a limited angular range and the imaged volume is reconstructed from the two-dimensional projections, thus providing three-dimensional structural information of the breast tissue. In this work, we investigated three representative reconstruction methods for this limited-angle cone-beam tomographic problem, including the backprojection (BP) method, the simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique (SART) and the maximum likelihood method with the convex algorithm (ML-convex). The SART and ML-convex methods were both initialized with BP results to achieve efficient reconstruction. A second generation GE prototype tomosynthesis mammography system with a stationary digital detector was used for image acquisition. Projection-view images were acquired from 21 angles in 3 increments over a 30 angular range. We used an American College of Radiology phantom and designed three additional phantoms to evaluate the image quality and reconstruction artifacts. In addition to visual comparison of the reconstructed images of different phantom sets, we employed the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), a line profile of features, an artifact spread function (ASF), a relative noise power spectrum (NPS), and a line object spread function (LOSF) to quantitatively evaluate the reconstruction results. It was found that for the phantoms with homogeneous background, the BP method resulted in less noisy tomosynthesized images and higher CNR values for masses than the SART and ML-convex methods. However, the two iterative methods provided greater contrast enhancement for both masses and calcification, sharper LOSF, and reduced inter-plane blurring and artifacts with better ASF behaviors for masses. For a contrast-detail phantom with heterogeneous tissue-mimicking background, the BP method had strong blurring artifacts along the x-ray source motion direction that obscured the contrast-detail objects, while the other two methods can remove the superimposed breast structures and significantly improve object conspicuity. With a properly selected relaxation parameter, the SART method with one iteration can provide tomosynthesized images comparable to those obtained from the ML-convex method with seven iterations, when BP results were used as initialization for both methods. (c) 2006 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
引用
收藏
页码:3781 / 3795
页数:15
相关论文
共 49 条
[41]   CCD-based detector for full-field digital mammography [J].
Stanton, M ;
Phillips, W ;
Stewart, A ;
Smilowitz, L ;
Williams, MB ;
Simoni, P ;
Ingersoll, C ;
McCauley, T ;
Qian, H .
MEDICAL IMAGING 1999: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, PTS 1 AND 2, 1999, 3659 :740-748
[42]   Comparison of tomosynthesis methods used with digital mammography [J].
Suryanarayanan, S ;
Karellas, A ;
Vedantham, S ;
Glick, SJ ;
D'Orsi, CJ ;
Baker, SP ;
Webber, RL .
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2000, 7 (12) :1085-1097
[43]   Evaluation of linear and nonlinear tomosynthetic reconstruction methods in digital mammography [J].
Suryanarayanan, S ;
Karellas, A ;
Vedantham, S ;
Baker, SP ;
Glick, SJ ;
D'Orsi, CJ ;
Webber, RL .
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2001, 8 (03) :219-224
[44]   Algebraic tomosynthesis reconstruction [J].
Wang, BL ;
Barner, K ;
Lee, D .
MEDICAL IMAGING 2004: IMAGE PROCESSING, PTS 1-3, 2004, 5370 :711-718
[45]   Applications of matrix inverse tomosynthesis [J].
Warp, RJ ;
Godfrey, DJ ;
Dobbins, JT .
MEDICAL IMAGING 2000: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2000, 3977 :376-383
[46]   Noise power spectra of images from digital mammography detectors [J].
Williams, MB ;
Mangiafico, PA ;
Simoni, PU .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (07) :1279-1293
[47]   Digital tomosynthesis mammography using a parallel maximum likelihood reconstruction method [J].
Wu, T ;
Zhang, JM ;
Moore, R ;
Rafferty, E ;
Kopans, D ;
Meleis, W ;
Kaeli, D .
MEDICAL IMAGING 2004: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, PTS 1 AND 2, 2004, 5368 :1-11
[48]   A comparison of reconstruction algorithms for breast tomosynthesis [J].
Wu, T ;
Moore, RH ;
Rafferty, EA ;
Kopans, DB .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2004, 31 (09) :2636-2647
[49]   Tomographic mammography using a limited number of low-dose cone-beam projection images [J].
Wu, T ;
Stewart, A ;
Stanton, M ;
McCauley, T ;
Phillips, W ;
Kopans, DB ;
Moore, RH ;
Eberhard, JW ;
Opsahl-Ong, B ;
Niklason, L ;
Williams, MB .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (03) :365-380