Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Which Phantom Is Better for Assessing the Image Quality in Full-Field Digital Mammography?: American College of Radiology Accreditation Phantom versus Digital Mammography Accreditation Phantom

Authors
Song, Sung EunSeo, Bo KyoungYie, AnKu, Bon KyungKim, Hee-YoungCho, Kyu RanChung, Hwan HoonLee, Seung HwaHwang, Kyu-Won
Issue Date
Nov-2012
Publisher
KOREAN RADIOLOGICAL SOC
Keywords
Breast; Mammography; Comparative study; Phantoms; Imaging
Citation
KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, v.13, no.6, pp.776 - 783
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
KCI
Journal Title
KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
Volume
13
Number
6
Start Page
776
End Page
783
URI
https://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/107036
DOI
10.3348/kjr.2012.13.6.776
ISSN
1229-6929
Abstract
Objective: To compare between the American College of Radiology (ACR) accreditation phantom and digital mammography accreditation phantom in assessing the image quality in full-field digital mammography (FFDM). Materials and Methods: In each week throughout the 42-week study, we obtained phantom images using both the ACR accreditation phantom and the digital mammography accreditation phantom, and a total of 42 pairs of images were included in this study. We assessed the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in each phantom image. A radiologist drew a square-shaped region of interest on the phantom and then the mean value of the SNR and the standard deviation were automatically provided on a monitor. SNR was calculated by an equation, measured mean value of SNR-constant coefficient of FFDM/standard deviation. Two breast radiologists scored visible objects (fibers, specks, and masses) with soft-copy images and calculated the visible rate (number of visible objects/total number of objects). We compared SNR and the visible rate of objects between the two phantoms and calculated the k-coefficient for interobserver agreement. Results: The SNR of the ACR accreditation phantom ranged from 42.0 to 52.9 (Mean, 47.3 +/- 2.79) and that of Digital Phantom ranged from 24.8 to 54.0 (Mean, 44.1 +/- 9.93) (p = 0.028). The visible rates of all three types of objects were much higher in the ACR accreditation phantom than those in the digital mammography accreditation phantom (p < 0.05). Interobserver agreement for visible rates of objects on phantom images was fair to moderate agreement (k-coefficients: 0.34-0.57). Conclusion: The ACR accreditation phantom is superior to the digital mammography accreditation phantom in terms of SNR and visibility of phantom objects. Thus, ACR accreditation phantom appears to be satisfactory for assessing the image quality in FFDM.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
College of Medicine > Department of Medical Science > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Related Researcher

Researcher Chung, Hwan Hoon photo

Chung, Hwan Hoon
College of Medicine (Department of Medical Science)
Read more

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE