Dose Reduction in Molecular Breast Imaging With a New Image-Processing Algorithm.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine whether application of a proprietary image-processing algorithm would allow a reduction in the necessary administered activity for molecular breast imaging (MBI) examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Images from standard-dose MBI examinations (300 MBq 99mTc-sestamibi) of 50 subjects were analyzed. The images were acquired in dynamic mode and showed at least one breast lesion. Half-dose MBI examinations were simulated by summing one-half of the dynamic frames and were processed with the algorithm under study in both a default and a preferred filter mode. Two breast radiologists independently completed a set of two-alternative forced-choice tasks to compare lesion conspicuity on standard-dose images, half-dose images, and the algorithm-processed half-dose images in both modes. RESULTS. Relative to the standard-dose images, the half-dose images were preferred in 4, the default-filtered half-dose images in 50, and preferred-filtered half-dose images in 76 of 100 readings. Compared with standard-dose images, in terms of lesion conspicuity, the half-dose images were rated better in 2, equivalent in 6, and poorer in 92 of 100 readings. The default-filtered half-dose images were rated better, equivalent, or poorer in 13, 73, and 14 of 100 readings. The preferred-filtered half-dose images were rated as better, equivalent, or poorer in 55, 34, and 11 of 100 readings. CONCLUSION. Compared with that on standard-dose images, lesion conspicuity on images obtained with the algorithm and acquired at one-half the standard dose was equivalent or better without compromise of image quality. The algorithm can also be used to decrease imaging time with a resulting increase in patient comfort and throughput.

Technical Note: Assessment of scatter originating from the x-ray tube collimator assembly of modern angiography systems.

PURPOSE: While scatter from the patient is assumed to be the primary source of occupational radiation dose associated with fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures, the potential contribution of scatter from the x-ray collimator assembly is unknown. The purpose of this work was to survey clinical x-ray angiography systems to assess the potential contribution of collimator assembly scatter on occupational radiation dose. METHODS: Experimental methods were designed to measure the relative contributions of scatter originating from within the collimator assembly of the x-ray tube to total scatter, which included scatter from a patient-simulating phantom. Measurements were acquired as a function of lateral distance from the x-ray beam center using a posterior anterior (PA) projection and at a fixed location for variable right anterior oblique to left anterior oblique projections in the range -90º to 90º. For one system, the collimator assembly was partially disassembled to assess the scatter contribution of individual components. For two systems, 0.5 mm Pb was added to the inner surface of the collimator assembly cover and tested for efficacy to block collimator assembly scatter. RESULTS: Considering all x-ray systems and only the PA projection, collimator assembly scatter contributed 20-50% to total scatter. For x-ray projection angles of -90º to 90º, the relative contribution of collimator assembly to total scatter was dependent on projection angle and ranged from 5% to 56%. X-ray systems with kerma-area product meters demonstrated higher collimator assembly scatter than those without. Considering all projection angles, the addition of 0.5 mm Pb to the inside of the collimator assembly cover reduced collimator assembly scatter from 28% to 16% of total scatter for both systems. CONCLUSION: Findings from this work suggest that contemporary radiation safety practices and guidelines should be revised to account for scatter originating from the collimator assembly of angiographic x-ray tubes.

Improving apparent diffusion coefficient accuracy on a compact 3T MRI scanner using gradient nonlinearity correction.

BACKGROUND: Gradient nonlinearity (GNL) leads to biased apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) in diffusion-weighted imaging. A gradient nonlinearity correction (GNLC) method has been developed for whole body systems, but is yet to be tested for the new compact 3T (C3T) scanner, which exhibits more complex GNL due to its asymmetrical design. PURPOSE: To assess the improvement of ADC quantification with GNLC for the C3T scanner. STUDY TYPE: Phantom measurements and retrospective analysis of patient data. PHANTOM/SUBJECTS: A diffusion quality control phantom with vials containing 0-30% polyvinylpyrrolidone in water was used. For in vivo data, 12 patient exams were analyzed (median age, 33). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Imaging was performed on the C3T and two commercial 3T scanners. A clinical DWI (repetition time [TR] = 10,000 msec, echo time [TE] = minimum, b = 1000 s/mm2 ) sequence was used for phantom imaging and 10 patient cases and a clinical DTI (TR = 6000-10,000 msec, TE = minimum, b = 1000 s/mm2 ) sequence was used for two patient cases. ASSESSMENT: The 0% vial was measured along three orthogonal axes, and at two different temperatures. The ADC for each concentration was compared between the C3T and two whole-body scanners. Cerebrospinal fluid and white matter ADCs were quantified for each patient and compared to values in literature. STATISTICAL TESTS: Paired t-test and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: For all PVP concentrations, the corrected ADC was within 2.5% of the reference ADC. On average, the ADC of cerebrospinal fluid and white matter post-GNLC were within 1% and 6%, respectively, of values reported in the literature and were significantly different from the uncorrected data (P < 0.05). DATA CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that GNL effects were more severe for the C3T due to the asymmetric gradient design, but our implementation of a GNLC compensated for these effects, resulting in ADC values that are in good agreement with values from the literature. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;48:1498-1507.