ArticleMedical physics2012
Implementation and evaluation of an expectation maximization reconstruction algorithm for gamma emission breast tomosynthesis.
Article in Medical physics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular Breast Imaging using Synthetic Projections from High-Purity Germanium Detectors: A Simulation Study.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe are developing a dual modality tomosynthesis breast scanner in which x-ray transmission tomosynthesis and gamma emission tomosynthesis are performed sequentially with the breast in a common configuration. In both modalities projection data are obtained over an angular range of less than 180° from one side of the mildly compressed breast resulting in incomplete and asymmetrical sampling. The objective of this work is to implement and evaluate a maximum likelihood expectation maximization (MLEM) reconstruction algorithm for gamma emission breast tomosynthesis (GEBT).
methodsA combination of Monte Carlo simulations and phantom experiments was used to test the MLEM algorithm for GEBT. The algorithm utilizes prior information obtained from the x-ray breast tomosynthesis scan to partially compensate for the incomplete angular sampling and to perform attenuation correction (AC) and resolution recovery (RR). System spatial resolution, image artifacts, lesion contrast, and signal to noise ratio (SNR) were measured as image quality figures of merit. To test the robustness of the reconstruction algorithm and to assess the relative impacts of correction techniques with changing angular range, simulations and experiments were both performed using acquisition angular ranges of 45°, 90° and 135°. For comparison, a single projection containing the same total number of counts as the full GEBT scan was also obtained to simulate planar breast scintigraphy.
resultsThe in-plane spatial resolution of the reconstructed GEBT images is independent of source position within the reconstructed volume and independent of acquisition angular range. For 45° acquisitions, spatial resolution in the depth dimension (the direction of breast compression) is degraded with increasing source depth (increasing distance from the collimator surface). Increasing the acquisition angular range from 45° to 135° both greatly reduces this depth dependence and improves the average depth dimension resolution from 10.8 to 4.8 mm. The 135° acquisition results in a near-isotropic, spatially uniform 3D resolution of approximately 4.3 mm full width at half maximum. Background nonuniformity (cupping) artifacts arise primarily from angular incompleteness for small angular range acquisition but primarily from gamma ray attenuation at larger angular range. However, background artifacts can be largely eliminated if both prior information regularization and AC are applied. An artificial decrease in lesion voxel value with increasing lesion depth can also be substantially reduced through a combination of AC and RR. In experiments using compressible gelatin breast phantoms, lesion contrast and SNR are about 2.6-8.8 times and 2.3-5.6 times higher, respectively, in GEBT than in planar breast scintigraphy depending on the acquisition angle, the gamma camera trajectory, and the lesion location. In addition, the strong reduction in lesion contrast and SNR with increasing lesion depth that is observed in planar breast scintigraphy can be largely overcome in GEBT.
conclusionsThe authors have demonstrated a promising EM-based reconstruction scheme for use in GEBT. Compared to planar breast scintigraphy GEBT provides superior and less position-dependent lesion contrast, lesion SNR, and spatial resolution as well as more accurate quantification of lesion-to-background activity concentration ratio.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.