Skip to main content
Log in

Does intensity windowing improve the detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms?

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study attempts to determine whether intensity windowing (IW) improves detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms. Clusters of five simulated calcifications were embedded in dense mammograms digitized at 50-μm pixels, 12 bits deep. Film images with no windowing applied were compared with film images with nine different window widths and levels applied. A simulated cluster was embedded in a realistic background of dense breast tissue, with the position of the cluster varied. The key variables involved in each trial included the position of the cluster, contrast level of the cluster, and the IW settings applied to the image. Combining the ten IW conditions, four contrast levels and four quadrant positions gave 160 combinations. The trials were constructed by pairing 160 combinations of key variables with 160 backgrounds. The entire experiment consisted of 800 trials. Twenty student observers were asked to detect the quadrant of the image in which the mass was located. There was a statistically significant improvement in detection performance for clusters of calcifications when the window width was set at 1024 with a level of 3328, and when the window width was set at 1024 with a level of 3456. The selected IW settings should be tested in the clinic with digital mammograms to determine whether calcification detection performance can be improved.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Homer MJ: Mammographic Interpretation: A practical approach. New York, NY, McGraw Hill, 1991, pp 4–5

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rosenman J, Roe CA, Cromartie R, et al: Portal Film enhancement: Technique and clinical utility. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Physics 25:333–338, 1993

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Shtern F: Digital mammography and related technologies: A perspective from the National Cancer Institute. Radiology 183:629–630, 1992

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Puff DT, Pisano ED, Muller KE, et al: A method for determination of optimal image enhancement for the detection of mammographic abnormalities. J Dig Imaging 7:161–171, 1994

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al: Utility of Intensity Windowing in Improved Detection of Simulated Masses in Mammograms of Dense Breasts. Presented at the Radiologic Society of North America Meeting. Chicago, IL, November 27, 1995

  6. McSweeney MB, Sprawls P, Egan RL: Enhanced Image Mammography. AJR 140:9–14, 1983

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Smathers RL, Bush E, Drace J, et al: Mammographic microcalcifications: Detection with xerography, screen film, and digitized film display. Radiology 159:673–677, 1986

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chan HP, Doi K, Galhorta S, et al: Image Feature analysis and computer-aided diagnosis in digital radiography: I. Automated detected of microcalcifications in mammography. Med Phys 14:538–547, 1987

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chan HP, Vyborny CJ, MacMahon H, et al: Digital mammography ROC studies of the effects of pixel size and unsharp-mask filtering on the detection of subtle microcalcifications. Investigative Radiol 22:581–589, 1987

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hale DA, Cook JF, Baniqued Z, et al: Selective Digital Enhancement of Conventional Film Mammography. J Surg Oncol 55:42–46, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yin F, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, et al: Comparison of Bilateral-Subtraction and Single-Image Processing Techniques in the Computerized Detection of Mammographic Masses. Investigative Radiol 28:473–781, 1993

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Yin F, Giger M, Doi K, et al: Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: Analysis of Bilateral Subtraction Images. Med Phys 18:955–963, 1991

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pizer SM: Psychovisual issues in the display of medical images. KH Hoehne, ed, Pictorial Information Systems in Medicine. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1985, pp 211–234

    Google Scholar 

  14. Revesz G, Kundel HL, Graber MD: The influence of structured noise on the detection of radiologic abnormalities. Investigative Radiol 9:479–486, 1974

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kundel HL, Reversz G: Lesion conspicuity, structured noise and fil reader error. AJR 126:1233–1238, 1976

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Revesz G, Kundel HL: Psychophysical studies of detection errors in chest radiology. Radiology 128:559–562, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  17. MacMillan NA, Creelman CD: Detection theory: A user guide. Cambridge, England, Cambridge, 1991, pp 135–136

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported by NIH PO1-CA 47982, NIH RO1-65583 and DOD DAMD 17-94-J-4345.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pisano, E.D., Chandramouli, J., Hemminger, B.M. et al. Does intensity windowing improve the detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms?. J Digit Imaging 10, 79–84 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168559

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168559

Key words

Navigation