Marc Pachoud et al 2004 Phys. Med. Biol. 49 5267 doi:10.1088/0031-9155/49/23/005
Marc Pachoud1, D Lepori2, Jean-François Valley1 and Francis R Verdun1
Show affiliationsOur objective is to describe a new test phantom that permits the objective assessment of image quality in conventional and digital mammography for different types of breast tissue. A test phantom, designed to represent a compressed breast, was made from tissue equivalent materials. Three separate regions, with different breast tissue compositions, are used to evaluate low and high contrast resolution, spatial resolution and image noise. The phantom was imaged over a range of kV using a Contour 2000 (Bennett) mammography unit with a Kodak MinR 2190-MinR L screen–film combination and a Senograph 2000D (General Electric) digital mammography unit. Objective image quality assessments for different breast tissue compositions were performed using the phantom for conventional and digital mammography. For a similar mean glandular dose (MGD), the digital system gives a significantly higher contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) than the screen–film system for 100% glandular tissue. In conclusion, in mammography, a range of exposure conditions is used for imaging because of the different breast tissue compositions encountered clinically. Ideally, the patient dose–image quality relationship should be optimized over the range of exposure conditions. The test phantom presented in this work permits image quality parameters to be evaluated objectively for three different types of breast tissue. Thus, it is a useful tool for optimizing the patient dose–image quality relationship.
Issue 23 (7 December 2004)
Received 9 March 2004, in final form 7 September 2004
Published 10 November 2004
Marc Pachoud et al 2004 Phys. Med. Biol. 49 5267
Juan J Pérez et al 2004 Phys. Med. Biol. 49 4383
Tat-Leung Yee and Robert Conte 2004 J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 37 L113
D Haranath et al 2006 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 39 4956
P Wahl et al 2009 New J. Phys. 11 113015
Alexandre Beelen et al. 2006 ApJ 642 694
M J Roberts 2004 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 37 2869
S. R. Federman et al. 2007 ApJ 660 919
Youhei Masada et al. 2007 ApJ 663 437
M. J. Reid et al. 2009 ApJ 700 137