TU-E-217BCD-09: The Feasibility of the Dual-Dictionary Method for Breast Computed Tomography Based on Photon-Counting Detectors

2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (6Part24) ◽  
pp. 3915-3915 ◽  
Author(s):  
B Zhao ◽  
H Ding ◽  
Y Lu ◽  
G Wang ◽  
J Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Photon Counting ◽  
Photon Counting Detectors ◽  
Breast Computed Tomography

scholarly journals Detection of Microcalcifications in Spiral Breast Computed Tomography with Photon-Counting Detector Is Feasible: A Specimen Study

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 848
Author(s):  
Matthias Wetzl ◽  
Evelyn Wenkel ◽  
Eva Balbach ◽  
Ebba Dethlefsen ◽  
Arndt Hartmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Breast Biopsy ◽  
Photon Counting ◽  
Diagnostic Confidence ◽  
Voxel Size ◽  
Photon Counting Detector ◽  
Smooth Kernel ◽  
Higher Sensitivity ◽  
Breast Computed Tomography

The primary objective of the study was to compare a spiral breast computed tomography system (SBCT) to digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for the detection of microcalcifications (MCs) in breast specimens. The secondary objective was to compare various reconstruction modes in SBCT. In total, 54 breast biopsy specimens were examined with mammography as a standard reference, with DBT, and with a dedicated SBCT containing a photon-counting detector. Three different reconstruction modes were applied for SBCT datasets (Recon1 = voxel size (0.15 mm)3, smooth kernel; Recon2 = voxel size (0.05 mm)3, smooth kernel; Recon3 = voxel size (0.05 mm)3, sharp kernel). Sensitivity and specificity of DBT and SBCT for the detection of suspicious MCs were analyzed, and the McNemar test was used for comparisons. Diagnostic confidence of the two readers (Likert Scale 1 = not confident; 5 = completely confident) was analyzed with ANOVA. Regarding detection of MCs, reader 1 had a higher sensitivity for DBT (94.3%) and Recon2 (94.9%) compared to Recon1 (88.5%; p < 0.05), while sensitivity for Recon3 was 92.4%. Respectively, reader 2 had a higher sensitivity for DBT (93.0%), Recon2 (92.4%), and Recon3 (93.0%) compared to Recon1 (86.0%; p < 0.05). Specificities ranged from 84.7–94.9% for both readers (p > 0.05). The diagnostic confidence of reader 1 was better with SBCT than with DBT (DBT 4.48 ± 0.88, Recon1 4.77 ± 0.66, Recon2 4.89 ± 0.44, and Recon3 4.75 ± 0.72; DBT vs. Recon1/2/3: p < 0.05), while reader 2 found no differences. Sensitivity and specificity for the detection of MCs in breast specimens is equal for DBT and SBCT when a small voxel size of (0.05 mm)3 is used with an equal or better diagnostic confidence for SBCT compared to DBT.

Performance of Photon-Counting Breast Computed Tomography, Digital Mammography, and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Evaluating Breast Specimens

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann-Christin Rößler ◽  
Willi Kalender ◽  
Daniel Kolditz ◽  
Christian Steiding ◽  
Veikko Ruth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Photon Counting ◽  
Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Breast Tomosynthesis ◽  
Breast Computed Tomography

scholarly journals Dedicated Spiral Breast Computed Tomography With a Single Photon-Counting Detector

2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Berger ◽  
Magda Marcon ◽  
Thomas Frauenfelder ◽  
Andreas Boss
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Single Photon ◽  
Photon Counting ◽  
Single Photon Counting ◽  
Photon Counting Detector ◽  
Breast Computed Tomography
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document