Analysis of digital image quality indexes for CIRS SP01 and CDMAM 3.4 mammographic phantoms

Analysis of the threshold image contrast obtained with the CDMAM 3.4 and CDMAM 4.0 phantoms

Quality control in mammography is a very important element. One of the parameters indicating the appropriate image quality is the threshold image contrast. The CDMAM phantom is used to measure this parameter. It is currently available in two versions 3.4 and 4.0. The aim of this work is to compare the threshold image contrast readings obtained with the CDMAM 3.4 and CDMAM 4.0 phantoms. In the measurements, 9 CDMAM 4.0 phantoms were used to check the difference in indications of individual copies. The phantom whose readings were closest to the average of all readings was used for comparative measurements with the CDMAM 3.4 phantom. Measurements were made on 40 mammography devices. The obtained images were read with the software provided by the phantom manufacturer and the CDMAM Analysis v2.3.0 (NCCPM) software. The average percentage difference between the minimum and maximum values indicated by the CDMAM 4.0 phantoms was 10.09%. Using the CDMAM Analysis v2.3.0 (NCCPM) software, the average difference in readings between the CDMAM 3.4 and CDMAM 4.0 phantoms is 7.93%, and when using the software provided by the phantom manufacturer, it is as much as 60.15%. The obtained results of the threshold image contrast are affected by the type of software used for reading and the accuracy of the execution of individual elements of the phantom. It is recommended to use CDMAM Analysis v2.3.0 (NCCPM) software or the latest software provided by the phantom manufacturer to read the phantom images.

Automated image quality assessment of mammography phantoms: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Computerized image analysis is a viable technique for evaluating image quality as a complement to human observers.

PURPOSE

To systematically review the image analysis software used in the assessment of 2D image quality using mammography phantoms.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search of multiple databases was performed from inception to July 2020 for articles that incorporated computerized analysis of 2D images of physical mammography phantoms to determine image quality.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies were included, 12 were carried out using direct digital imaging and 14 using screen film mammography. The ACR phantom (model-156) was the most frequently evaluated phantom, possibly due to the lack of accepted standard software. In comparison to the inter-observer variations, the computerized image analysis was more consistent in scoring test objects. The template matching method was found to be one of the most reliable algorithms, especially for high-contrast test objects, while several algorithms found low-contrast test objects to be harder to distinguish due to the smaller contrast variations between test objects and their backgrounds. This was particularly true for small object sizes.

CONCLUSION

Image analysis software was in agreement with human observers but demonstrated higher consistency and reproducibility of quality evaluation. Additionally, using computerized analysis, several quantitative metrics such as contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) could be used to complement the conventional scoring method. Implementing a computerized approach for monitoring image quality over time would be crucial to detect any deteriorating mammography system before clinical images are impacted.