A REFINED QUALITY ASSURANCE TOOL FOR TODAY’S ADVANCED IMAGING SYSTEMS
Model 011A is a tissue-equivalent, anthropomorphic phantoms designed to test performance of any mammographic system. Simulated calcifications, fibrous ducts, and tumor masses are embedded into the phantom as test objects. Test objects range in size to allow system checks at varying levels of difficulty.
CIRS resin material mimics the photon attenuation coefficients of a range of breast tissues. The average elemental composition of the mimicked tissue is based on the individual elemental compositions of adipose and glandular tissues as reported by Hammerstein.
Attenuation coefficients are calculated by using the “mixture rule” and the Photon Mass Attenuation and Energy Absorption Coefficient Table of J.H. Hubbell.
- Realistically Shaped
- Tissue Equivalent
- Monitor Image Quality & Dose
The methodology and design of these phantoms was developed by Dr. Panos Fatouros and his associates at the Medical College of Virginia.
Milanfar P. Super-resolution imaging. CRC Press; 2011:394-396. View
Shafer CM, Samei E, Lo JY. The quantitative potential for breast tomosynthesis imaging. Medical Physics. 2010;37(3). View
Pachoud M. Development of a test object for an objective assessment of image quality in conventional or digital mammography. 2002; 219-225. View
Nassivera E, Nardin L. Daily quality control programme in mammography. Br J Radiol. 1996; 69(818):148-152. View
Skubic SE. The effect of breast composition on absorbed dose and image contrast. Medical Physics. 1989; 16(4). View
Fatouros PP, et al. Development and Use of Realistically Shaped Tissue Equivalent Phantoms for assessing the Mammographic Process. Presented at 74th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, Chicago IL,1988. View
Hu YH, Zhao W. The effect of angular dose distribution on the detection of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis. Med Phys. 2011;38(5):2455-66. View
Youn, Hanbean, Jong Chul Han, Seungman Yun, Soohwa Kam, Seungryong Cho, and Ho Kyung Kim. “Characterization of On-site Digital Mammography Systems: Direct versus Indirect Conversion Detectors.” Journal of the Korean Physical Society 66.12 (2015): 1926-935. Web. View
Izdihar K, Kanaga KC, Krishnapillai V, Sulaiman T. Determination of Tube Output (kVp) and Exposure Mode for Breast Phantom of Various Thicknesses/Glandularity for Digital Mammography. Malays J Med Sci. 2015;22(1):40-9. View
Baptista M, Di maria S, Barros S, et al. Dosimetric characterization and organ dose assessment in digital breast tomosynthesis: Measurements and Monte Carlo simulations using voxel phantoms. Med Phys. 2015;42(7):3788-800. View
Zhao, A., M. Santana, E. Samei, and J. Lo. “Comparison of Effects of Dose on Image Quality in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis across Multiple Vendors.” Proc. SPIE 10132, Medical Imaging 2017: Physics of Medical Imaging, 101324E, 2017. Web. View
Marimón, E., H. Nait-Charif, A. Khan, P. Marsden and O. Diaz. ” Scatter reduction for grid-less mammography using the convolution-based image post-processing technique “, Proc. SPIE 10132, Medical Imaging 2017: Physics of Medical Imaging, 101324D (March 9, 2017); View