SpringerLink
Log in

Modulation transfer function of digital breast tomosynthesis: a comparison of various edge devices

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The modulation transfer function (MTF) is a fundamental tool for assessing the sharpness of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) systems and is primarily measured using edge devices. We compared the MTF of a Senographe Pristina DBT system using four-edge devices. These devices were composed of stainless steel with a thickness of 0.6, 0.8, and 1.0 mm, and 1.0 mm tungsten, based on different international guidelines. We evaluated spatial frequencies at MTFs of 0.5 (MTF50%) and 0.1 (MTF10%). The collimator-equipped and non-collimator configurations of the DBT were compared. We found no appreciable differences between scan and chest wall–nipple directions. Both MTF50% (2.90–2.99 cycles/mm) and MTF10% (6.69–6.94 cycles/mm) demonstrated minimal variation across the different edge devices. The collimator-equipped system exhibited an MTF50% that was approximately 5% higher than that of the non-collimator configuration. The choice of the edge device did not appreciably impact the MTF.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Gao Y, Moy L, Heller SL. Digital breast tomosynthesis: update on technology, evidence, and clinical practice. Radiographics. 2021;41:321–7. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2021200101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lowry KP, Coley RY, Miglioretti DL, et al. Screening performance of digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography in community practice by patient age, screening round, and breast density. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3: e2011792. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.11792.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Tirada N, Li G, Dreizin D, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis: physics, artifacts, and quality control considerations. Radiographics. 2019;39:413–26. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2019180046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Breast tomosynthesis quality control protocol (phys.-techn.) version 1.03. In: European Reference Organisation for Quality Assured Breast Screening and Diagnostic Services. Publications Office; 2018.

  5. International Electrotechnical Commission. Evaluation and routine testing in medical imaging departments - Part 3–6: Acceptance and constancy tests—imaging performance of mammographic X-ray equipment used in a mammographic tomosynthesis mode of operation. Publication 61223–3–6: 2020. Geneva, Switzerland. 2020.

  6. Japanese Industrial Standards. Evaluation and routine testing in medical imaging departments-Part 3–6: acceptance and constancy tests-Imaging performance of mammographic X-ray equipment used in a mammographic tomosynthesis mode of operation. Publication JIS Z 4752–3–6: 2020. Tokyo, Japan. 2020.

  7. EFOMP protocol: quality control in digital breast tomosynthesis (version 01.03.2023). In: European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics. 2023.

  8. International Electrotechnical Commission. Medical electrical equipment—Characteristics of digital X-ray imaging devices—Part 1–2: Determination of the detective quantum efficiency—Detectors used in mammography. Publication 62220–1–2:2007. Geneva, Switzerland. 2007.

  9. Carton AK, Vandenbroucke D, Struye L, et al. Validation of MTF measurement for digital mammography quality control. Med Phys. 2005;32:1684–95. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1921667.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shaheen E, Marshall N, Bosmans H. Investigation of the effect of tube motion in breast tomosynthesis: continuous or step and shoot? Proc SPIE. 2011;7961:79611E. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.877348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Richman IB, Hoag JR, Xu X, et al. Adoption of digital breast tomosynthesis in clinical practice. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179:1292–5. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1058.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Juntendo University Nerima Hospital, 3-1-10 Takanodai, Nerima-ku, Tokyo, 177-8521, Japan

    Takashi Shirato, Kazuhiko Doryo, Shiori Yamada & Yutaka Ozaki

Authors
  1. Takashi Shirato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kazuhiko Doryo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shiori Yamada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yutaka Ozaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takashi Shirato.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or nonfinancial interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

This study did not involve any human participants or animals.

Informed consent

Not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shirato, T., Doryo, K., Yamada, S. et al. Modulation transfer function of digital breast tomosynthesis: a comparison of various edge devices. Radiol Phys Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-024-00815-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-024-00815-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation