Quantitative Breast Density in Contrast-Enhanced Mammography

Breast density quantification in dual-energy mammography using virtual anthropomorphic phantoms

PURPOSE

Breast density is a significant risk factor for breast cancer and can impact the sensitivity of screening mammography. Area-based breast density measurements may not provide an accurate representation of the tissue distribution, therefore volumetric breast density (VBD) measurements are preferred. Dual-energy mammography enables volumetric measurements without additional assumptions about breast shape. In this work we evaluated the performance of a dual-energy decomposition technique for determining VBD by applying it to virtual anthropomorphic phantoms.

METHODS

The dual-energy decomposition formalism was used to quantify VBD on simulated dual-energy images of anthropomorphic virtual phantoms with known tissue distributions. We simulated 150 phantoms with volumes ranging from 50 to 709 mL and VBD ranging from 15% to 60%. Using these results, we validated a correction for the presence of skin and assessed the method's intrinsic bias and variability. As a proof of concept, the method was applied to 14 sets of clinical dual-energy images, and the resulting breast densities were compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements.

RESULTS

Virtual phantom VBD measurements exhibited a strong correlation (Pearson'sr > 0.95 $r > 0.95$ ) with nominal values. The proposed skin correction eliminated the variability due to breast size and reduced the bias in VBD to a constant value of -2%. Disagreement between clinical VBD measurements using MRI and dual-energy mammography was under 10%, and the difference in the distributions was statistically non-significant. VBD measurements in both modalities had a moderate correlation (Spearman'sρ $\rho \ $ = 0.68).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results in virtual phantoms indicate that the material decomposition method can produce accurate VBD measurements if the presence of a third material (skin) is considered. The results from our proof of concept showed agreement between MRI and dual-energy mammography VBD. Assessment of VBD using dual-energy images could provide complementary information in dual-energy mammography and tomosynthesis examinations.

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.

Radiation Dose of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: A Two-Center Prospective Comparison

The radiation dose associated with contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) has been investigated only by single-center studies. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the radiation dose between two centers performing CEM within two prospective studies, using the same type of equipment. The CEM mean glandular dose (MGD) was computed for low energy (LE) and high energy (HE) images and their sum was calculated for each view. MGD and related parameters (entrance dose, breast thickness, compression, and density) were compared between the two centers using the Mann−Whitney test. Finally, per-patient MGD was calculated by pooling the two datasets and determining the contribution of LE and HE images. A total of 348 CEM examinations were analyzed (228 from Center 1 and 120 from Center 2). The median total MGD per view was 2.33 mGy (interquartile range 2.19−2.51 mGy) at Center 1 and 2.46 mGy (interquartile range 2.32−2.70 mGy) at Center 2, with a 0.15 mGy median difference (p < 0.001) equal to 6.2%. LE-images contributed between 64% and 77% to the total patient dose in CEM, with the remaining 23−36% being associated with HE images. The mean radiation dose for a two-view bilateral CEM exam was 4.90 mGy, about 30% higher than for digital mammography.