Division of Diagnostic Imaging Physics, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, California.
Acad Radiol. 2022 Jun;29(6):841-850. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2021.08.014. Epub 2021 Sep 23.
To quantitatively compare breast parenchymal texture between two Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) vendors using images from the same patients.
This retrospective study included consecutive patients who had normal screening DBT exams performed in January 2018 from GE and normal screening DBT exams in adjacent years from Hologic. Power spectrum analysis was performed within the breast tissue region. The slope of a linear function between log-frequency and log-power, β, was derived as a quantitative measure of breast texture and compared within and across vendors along with secondary parameters (laterality, view, year, image format, and breast density) with correlation tests and t-tests.
A total of 24,339 DBT slices or synthetic 2D images from 85 exams in 25 women were analyzed. Strong power-law behavior was verified from all images. Values of β d did not differ significantly for laterality, view, or year. Significant differences of β were observed across vendors for DBT images (Hologic: 3.4±0.2 vs GE: 3.1±0.2, 95% CI on difference: 0.27 to 0.30) and synthetic 2D images (Hologic: 2.7±0.3 vs GE: 3.0±0.2, 95% CI on difference: -0.36 to -0.27), and density groups with each vendor: scattered (GE: 3.0±0.3, Hologic: 3.3±0.3) vs. heterogeneous (GE: 3.2±0.2, Hologic: 3.4±0.1), 95% CI (-0.27, -0.08) and (-0.21, -0.05), respectively.
There are quantitative differences in the presentation of breast imaging texture between DBT vendors and across breast density categories. Our findings have relevance and importance for development and optimization of AI algorithms related to breast density assessment and cancer detection.
使用来自同一位患者的图像,定量比较两种数字乳腺断层摄影术(DBT)供应商的乳腺实质纹理。
本回顾性研究纳入了 2018 年 1 月接受 GE 正常筛查 DBT 检查和相邻年份接受 Hologic 正常筛查 DBT 检查的连续患者。在乳腺组织区域内进行功率谱分析。通过对数频率和对数功率之间的线性函数的斜率,β,作为乳腺纹理的定量测量,并与相关性测试和 t 检验一起在供应商内部和之间以及次要参数(侧别、视图、年份、图像格式和乳腺密度)进行比较。
共分析了 25 名女性 85 次检查的 24339 个 DBT 切片或合成二维图像。所有图像均验证了较强的幂律行为。β d 值在侧别、视图或年份方面没有显著差异。在供应商之间,DBT 图像(Hologic:3.4±0.2 vs GE:3.1±0.2,差异的 95%置信区间:0.27 至 0.30)和合成二维图像(Hologic:2.7±0.3 vs GE:3.0±0.2,差异的 95%置信区间:-0.36 至-0.27)以及每个供应商的密度组之间存在显著差异:散在(GE:3.0±0.3,Hologic:3.3±0.3)与异质(GE:3.2±0.2,Hologic:3.4±0.1),95%置信区间(-0.27,-0.08)和(-0.21,-0.05)。
DBT 供应商之间以及乳腺密度类别之间乳腺成像纹理的呈现存在定量差异。我们的发现对于与乳腺密度评估和癌症检测相关的人工智能算法的开发和优化具有相关性和重要性。