Chieko Nagashima, Presenter: Nothing to Disclose

Nachiko Uchiyama MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Yuichi Nagai, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Hiroyuki Kobayashi, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Keiichi Masuyama, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Mio Nagata, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Noriyuki Moriyama MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

et al, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

et al, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

At present, visual analysis utilizing ACR phantom or CDMAM contrast detail phantom are common procedures that are capable for us to check QC (Quality Control) in daily usage in digital mammography. We developed a novel phantom and the software dedicated for digital mammography (FCR 1 Shot Phantom M Plus : Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) that enabled us to analyze physical characteristics with simplicity compared to the analysis of EUREF and IEC method for DQE in case of MTF.

Image acquisition systems were a combination of Mammomat 3000 Nova (SIEMENS, Germany) and FCR PROFECT CS (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan), or Mammomat 3000 (SIEMENS, Germany) and FCR PROFECT CS (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan). In this study, we measured 1) CNR (Contrast to Noise Ratio), 2) Geometric Distortion, 3) Image Receptor Homogeneity, 4) Missed Tissue at Chest Wall Side, and 5) MTF (Modulation Transfer Function) utilizing our phantom. In addition, we evaluated whether or not these values are consistent with those values in accordance with EUREF.

1) In CNR, the values in our novel phantom showed from 5-8% lower compared to the values in EUREF which includes measuring position difference effect. 2) In Geometric Distortion, relative difference between them was less than 1%. 3) In Image Receptor Homogeneity, the difference between them in PV (Pixel Value) Ratio was less than 5% and the difference between them in SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio) was less than 3%. 4) In Missed Tissue at Chest Wall Side, the values in our phantom showed 0.2-0.6mm shorter compared to the values of EUREF. 5) In MTF, the values in our novel phantom showed 20% higher compared to the values of IEC method for DQE. In total, the values between utilizing our phantom and the values in EUREF were consistent. In addition, total time of physical analysis utilizing our novel phantom required only 10 minutes or less.

Our novel phantom and the software are useful and an ideal analysis for digital mammography in QC because of its objectiveness compared to the subjective present analysis such as ACR phantom or CDMAM contrast detail phantom.

Our novel phantom can be alternative for digital mammography in connection with objective QC analysis .

Nagashima, C, Uchiyama, N, Nagai, Y, Kobayashi, H, Masuyama, K, Nagata, M, Moriyama, N, et al, , et al, , Preliminary Experiences with a Novel Phantom and the Software Dedicated for Digital Mammography: Comparison with EUREF (European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Breast Cancer).  Radiological Society of North America 2007 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, November 25 - November 30, 2007 ,Chicago IL. http://archive.rsna.org/2007/5003069.html