Alkhalifah K H, Brindhaban A, Asbeutah A M
J Xray Sci Technol. 2016 Oct 6;24(5):681-689. doi: 10.3233/XST-160580.
Magnification mammography is performed to enhance the visibility of small structures at the expense of relatively high radiation dose as a complementary examination to standard mammography. The introduction of post-processing capabilities and the widespread use of digital mammography has promoted some controversy in the last decade on whether similar visibility can be achieved using electronic zoom. The aim of this study is to compare the visibility of small structures in images obtained by the two techniques stated above for different exposure conditions.
Images of a Fluke Biomedical Model 18-220 Mammography Accreditation Phantom were obtained using standard techniques and geometric magnification, using a digital mammography unit, with different exposure factors. Three different target/filter combinations (Mo/Mo,Mo/Rh,Rh/Rh), variable kVp (26-32), and automatic exposure control were used. Images obtained using standard technique were electronically zoomed and compared to the corresponding magnification mammograms. Comparisons were based on the visibility of structures evaluated by five senior technologist with extensive experience in mammography. Statistical analysis was performed using non-parametric tests.
Visibility of structures was not affected by the kV used for a given target/filter combination for both techniques (p > 0.065). Target/filter combination of Mo/Mo provided better visibility of micro-calcification and fibers (p < 0.026) in geometric magnification technique and Mo/Rh in the digital zoom technique. No significant differences were observed in the visibility of simulated breast masses. The overall image score was significantly higher (p < 0.001) for geometric magnification over the digital zoom for Mo/Mo & Rh/Rh combinations.
Although sufficient image quality was maintained in electronically zoomed images, geometric magnification provided better overall visualization of structures in the phantom.
放大乳腺摄影用于增强小结构的可见性，但代价是辐射剂量相对较高，作为标准乳腺摄影的补充检查。在过去十年中，后处理功能的引入和数字乳腺摄影的广泛使用引发了一些关于使用电子变焦是否能实现类似可见性的争议。本研究的目的是比较在不同曝光条件下，上述两种技术所获得图像中小结构的可见性。
使用数字乳腺摄影设备，采用标准技术和几何放大，针对不同的曝光因素，获取了Fluke Biomedical Model 18 - 220乳腺摄影认证体模的图像。使用了三种不同的靶/滤过组合（钼/钼、钼/铑、铑/铑）、可变的千伏峰值（26 - 32）以及自动曝光控制。将使用标准技术获得的图像进行电子变焦，并与相应的放大乳腺造影片进行比较。比较基于由五位在乳腺摄影方面有丰富经验的资深技术人员评估的结构可见性。使用非参数检验进行统计分析。
对于两种技术，给定靶/滤过组合所使用的千伏峰值均不影响结构的可见性（p > 0.065）。在几何放大技术中，钼/钼的靶/滤过组合能更好地显示微钙化和纤维（p < 0.026），在数字变焦技术中则是钼/铑。在模拟乳腺肿块的可见性方面未观察到显著差异。对于钼/钼和铑/铑组合，几何放大的总体图像评分显著高于数字变焦（p < 0.001）。
尽管电子变焦图像保持了足够的图像质量，但几何放大能更好地整体显示体模中的结构。
Zotero 插件