Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T17:22:23.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 12 - Breast computed tomography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

By
Gary J. Whitman ,
Chao-Jen Lai ,
Xinming Liu ,
Malak Itani ,
Raunak Khisty  and
Chris C. Shaw
Edited by
Gary J. Whitman  and
Tamara Milner Haygood
Gary J. Whitman
Affiliation:
MD Anderson Cancer Center
Tamara Milner Haygood
Affiliation:
MD Anderson Cancer Center
Get access

Summary

Background

The idea of breast computed tomography (breast CT) was conceived and explored not long after computed tomography (CT) was developed and commercialized. First attempts to image breasts with CT involved the use of a specially designed CT system (CT/M) [1–5] as well as a conventional body scanner [6,7]. The CT/M system suffered from poor image quality and long scanning times and did not prove to be practical. The use of a body scanner for breast imaging requires the entire chest to be exposed and included in image reconstruction. This causes two problems: first, the chest is unnecessarily exposed, increasing radiation dose to the patient; second, since the breasts are only a small part of the chest, only a small number of voxels can be used to represent the breasts, leading to poor resolution. These problems led to attempts to develop edicated CT units in which one of the breasts was scanned with dedicated scanning hardware, sparing the rest of the chest from radiation and allowing all available voxels to be used to represent the breast in the reconstructed images, leading to much improved resolution. This new imaging technique involved a different imaging geometry, often referred to as pendant geometry, with the patient positioned prone with one breast protruding downward through an opening and scanned by a specially designed scanner underneath the table. Because of technological limitations, this concept was not pursued until the early 2000s.

Type
Chapter
Information
Digital Mammography
A Practical Approach
 , pp. 125 - 143
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chang, CH, Sibala, JL, Gallagher, JH, et al. Computed tomography of the breast: a preliminary report. Radiology 1977; 124: 827–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gisvold, JJ, Karsell, PR, Reese, EC.Clinical evaluation of computerized tomographic mammography. Mayo Clin Proc 1977; 52: 181–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Chang, CH, Sibala, JL, Fritz, SL, et al. Computed tomographic evaluation of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1978; 131: 459–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gisvold, JJ, Reese, DF, Karsell, PR.Computed tomographic mammography (CTM). AJR Am J Roentgenol 1979; 133: 1143–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, CH, Sibala, JL, Fritz, SL, et al. Computed tomography in detection and diagnosis of breast cancer. Cancer 1980; 46(4 Suppl): 939–46.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, CH, Nesbit, DE, Fisher, DR, et al. Computed tomographic mammography using a conventional body scanner. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1982; 138: 553–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muller, JW, van Waes, PF, Koehler, PR.Computed tomography of breast lesions: comparison with x-ray mammography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1983; 7: 650–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boone, JM, Nelson, TR, Lindfors, KK, Seibert, JA.Dedicated breast CT: radiation dose and image quality evaluation. Radiology 2001; 221: 657–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, B, Ning, R.Cone-beam volume CT breast imaging: feasibility study. Med Phys 2002; 29: 755–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boone, JM, Kwan, AL, Yang, K, et al. Computed tomography for imaging the breast. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2006; 11: 103–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ning, R, Conover, D, Yu, Y, et al. A novel cone beam breast CT scanner: system evaluation. Proc SPIE 2007; 6510: 651030. DOI: 10.1117/12.710340.Google Scholar
Lindfors, KK, Boone, JM, Nelson, TR, et al. Dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2008; 246: 725–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Connell, A, Conover, DL, Zhang, Y, et al. Cone-beam CT for breast imaging: radiation dose, breast coverage, and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195: 496–509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKinley, RL, Tornai, MP, Samei, E, Bradshaw, ML.Initial study of quasi-monochromatic x-ray beam performance for x-ray computed mammotomography. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2005; 52: 1243–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tornai, MP, McKinley, RL, Brzymialkiewicz, CN, et al., eds. Design and development of a fully-3D dedicated x-ray computed mammotomography system. Proc SPIE 2005; 5745: 189–97. DOI: 10.1117/12.595636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, CJ, Shaw, CC, Chen, L, et al. Visibility of microcalcification in cone beam breast CT: effects of x-ray tube voltage and radiation dose. Med Phys 2007; 34: 2995–3004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Connor, JM, Glick, SJ, Gong, X, Didier, C, Mah’d, M. Characterization of a prototype, tabletop x-ray CT breast imaging system. Proc SPIE 2007; 6510: 65102T. DOI: 10.1117/12.713751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, WT, Carkaci, S, Chen, L, et al. Dedicated cone-beam breast CT: feasibility study with surgical mastectomy specimens. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 1312–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Connor, JM, Das, M, Didier, C, Mah’D, M, Glick, SJ. Using mastectomy specimens to develop breast models for breast tomosynthesis and CT breast imaging. Proc SPIE 2008; 6913: 691315. DOI: 10.1117/12.772666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, L, Shaw, CC, Altunbas, MC, et al. Feasibility of volume-of-interest (VOI) scanning technique in cone beam breast CT: a preliminary study. Med Phys 2008; 35: 3482–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, L, Shen, Y, Lai, CJ, et al. Dual resolution cone beam breast CT: a feasibility study. Med Phys 2009; 36: 4007–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lai, CJ, Chen, L, Zhang, H, et al. Reduction in x-ray scatter and radiation dose for volume-of-interest (VOI) cone-beam breast CT: a phantom study. Phys Med Biol 2009; 54: 6691–709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prionas, ND, Lindfors, KK, Ray, S, et al. Contrast-enhanced dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2010; 256: 714–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
von Smekal, L, Kachelriess, M, Stepina, E, Kalender, WA.Geometric misalignment and calibration in cone-beam tomography. Med Phys 2004; 31: 3242–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriakou, Y, Deak, P, Langner, O, Kalender, WA.Concepts for dose determination in flat-detector CT. Phys Med Biol 2008; 53: 3551–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russo, P, Lauria, A, Mettivier, G, Montesi, MC, Villani, N.Dose distribution in cone-beam breast computed tomography: an experimental phantom study. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2010; 57: 366–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russo, P, Mettivier, G, Lauria, A, Montesi, MC.X-ray cone-beam breast computed tomography: phantom studies. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2010; 57: 160–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ning, R, Conover, D, Yu, Y, et al. A novel cone beam breast CT scanner: preliminary system evaluation. Proc SPIE 2006; 6142: 614211. .Google Scholar
Crotty, DJ, McKinley, RL, Tornai, MP.Experimental spectral measurements of heavy K-edge filtered beams for x-ray computed mammotomography. Phys Med Biol 2007; 52: 603–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glick, SJ, Thacker, S, Gong, X, Liu, B.Evaluating the impact of x-ray spectral shape on image quality in flat-panel CT breast imaging. Med Phys 2007; 34: 5–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vedantham, S, Karellas, A, Suryanarayanan, S, et al. Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype. Med Phys 2000; 27: 558–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Floyd, CE, Warp, RJ, Dobbins, JT, et al. Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography. Radiology 2001; 218: 683–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, SC, Kim, HK, Chun, IK, et al. A flat-panel detector based micro-CT system: performance evaluation for small-animal imaging. Phys Med Biol 2003; 48: 4173–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conover, DL, Ning, R, Yu, Y, et al. Small animal imaging using a flat panel detector-based cone beam computed tomography (FPD-CBCT) imaging system. Proc SPIE 2005; 5745: 307–18. DOI: 10.1117/12.595582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stock, M, Pasler, M, Birkfellner, W, et al. Image quality and stability of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) devices: a comparative study. Radiother Oncol 2009; 93: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boone, JM, Shah, N, Nelson, TR.A comprehensive analysis of DgN(CT) coefficients for pendant-geometry cone-beam breast computed tomography. Med Phys 2004; 31: 226–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thacker, SC, Glick, SJ.Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for flat-panel CT breast imaging. Phys Med Biol 2004; 49: 5433–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pan, X, Siewerdsen, J, La Riviere, PJ, Kalender, WA.Anniversary paper. Development of x-ray computed tomography: the role of medical physics and AAPM from the 1970s to present. Med Phys 2008; 35: 3728–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
World Health Organization. Breast cancer: prevention and control, 2011. (accessed April 2012).
International Agency for Research on Cancer. World Cancer Report. Lyon: IARC, 2008.Google Scholar
Jackson, VP, Hendrick, RE, Feig, SA, Kopans, DB.Imaging of the radiographically dense breast. Radiology 1993; 188: 297–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mandelson, MT, Oestreicher, N, Porter, PL, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 1081–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bird, RE, Wallace, TW, Yankaskas, BC.Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. Radiology 1992; 184: 613–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berg, WA, Gutierrez, L, NessAiver, MS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004; 233: 830–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gong, X.A computer simulation study comparing lesion detection accuracy with digital mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and cone-beam CT breast imaging. Med Phys 2006; 33: 1041–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raylman, RR, Abraham, J, Hazard, H, et al. Initial clinical test of a breast-PET scanner. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2011; 55: 58–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowen, SL, Wu, Y, Chaudhari, AJ, et al. Initial characterization of a dedicated breast PET/CT scanner during human imaging. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 1401–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curpen, BN, Sickles, EA, Sollitto, RA, et al. The comparative value of mammographic screening for women 40–49 years old versus women 50–64 years old. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164: 1099–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnesson, LG, Vitak, B, Manson, JC, Fagerberg, G, Smeds, S. Diagnostic outcome of repeated mammography screening. World J Surg 1995; 19: 372–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jong, RA, Yaffe, MJ, Skarpathiotakis, M, et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2003; 228: 842–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cai, G, Hu, WG, Chen, JY, et al. Impact of residual and intrafractional errors on strategy of correction for image-guided accelerated partial breast irradiation. Radiat Oncol 2010; 5: 96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Topolnjak, R, Sonke, JJ, Nijkamp, J, et al. Breast patient setup error assessment: comparison of electronic portal image devices and cone-beam computed tomography matching results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 78: 1235–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hasan, Y, Kim, L, Wloch, J, et al. Comparison of planned versus actual dose delivered for external beam accelerated partial breast irradiation using cone-beam CT and deformable registration. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 80: 1473–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Topolnjak, R, de Ruiter, P, Remeijer, P, et al. Image-guided radiotherapy for breast cancer patients: surgical clips as surrogate for breast excision cavity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 81: e187–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
He, W, Huda, W, Magill, D, Tavrides, E, Yao, H. Patient doses and projection angle in cone beam CT. Med Phys 2010; 37: 2359–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winey, B, Zygmanski, P, Lyatskaya, Y.Evaluation of radiation dose delivered by cone beam CT and tomosynthesis employed for setup of external breast irradiation. Med Phys 2009; 36: 164–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cai, W, Ning, R, Conover, D. Scatter correction for clinical cone beam CT breast imaging based on breast phantom studies. J Xray Sci Technol 2011; 19: 91–109.Google ScholarPubMed
Keyrilainen, J, Fernandez, M, Bravin, A, et al. Comparison of in vitro breast cancer visibility in analyser-based computed tomography with histopathology, mammography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Synchrotron Radiat 2011; 18: 689–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×