Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4056
ISSN (Online): 1875-6603

Research Article

Reference Range of CT Value in NC-CBBCT Based on Female Breast Structure

Author(s): Wei Wei, Wuning Zhong, Wei Kang, Xin Zhao, XianLin Yi* and DanKe Su*

Volume 19, Issue 13, 2023

Published on: 14 February, 2023

Article ID: e230123213055 Pages: 10

DOI: 10.2174/1573405619666230123155411

Price: $65

Abstract

Background: As a new high-resolution three-dimensional CT imaging technology, the essential reference range of CT values in Cone-beam breast computed tomography (CBBCT) has not been established to date.

Purpose: To determine the reference range of computed tomography (CT) values in CBBCT for clinical breast examination.

Materials and Methods: In total, 913 cases (1167 lateral) were subject to CBBCT. CT values of the glandular tissue, fat and different quadrants and different distances of CBBCT images were analyzed. The nipple and muscle were also evaluated.

Results: A total of 672 lateral breasts were included in the normal group for investigation. The reference range of the absolute CT value of the chest wall muscle is -136.68~43.36 HU. The reference range of the absolute CT value of the nipple is 176.39~334.02 HU. The reference range of the absolute CT value of fat is -190.4~-63.67HU, and of glandular tissue is -12.2~199.07HU.

Conclusion: Our results firstly established the baseline CT values of Non-contrast CBBCT in female breasts, which will benefit cancer screening and lesion locating. The closer the normal breast fat and glandular tissue is to the nipple, the greater the CT value. The older the age, the lower the density. The CT values of fat are unstable in a distance of less than 5 cm, and the CT values of glandular tissues are relatively stable. The difference between the upper and lower quadrants is significant in the same lateral breast and the same section.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71(1): 7-33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.21654] [PMID: 33433946]
[2]
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022; 72(1): 7-33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.21708] [PMID: 35020204]
[3]
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: Globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71(3): 209-49.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660] [PMID: 33538338]
[4]
O’Connell AM, Marini TJ, Kawakyu-O’Connor DT. Cone-beam breast computed tomography: Time for a new paradigm in breast imaging. J Clin Med 2021; 10(21): 5135.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10215135] [PMID: 34768656]
[5]
Neubauer C, Yilmaz JS, Bronsert P, et al. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography, digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis for microcalcifications and margins to microcalcifications in breast specimens. Sci Rep 2022; 12(1): 17639.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21616-3] [PMID: 36271228]
[6]
Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Moy L. Contrast‐enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019; 50(2): 377-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26654] [PMID: 30659696]
[7]
Pelc NJ, Chesler DA. Utilization of cross-plane rays for threedimensional reconstruction by filtered back-projection 1979; 3: 385-95.
[8]
Feldkamp LA, Davis LC, Kress JW. Practical cone-beam algorithm. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis 1984; 1(6): 612-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.1.000612]
[9]
Boone JM, Nelson TR, Lindfors KK, Seibert JA. Dedicated breast CT: Radiation dose and image quality evaluation. Radiology 2001; 221(3): 657-67.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2213010334] [PMID: 11719660]
[10]
Lindfors KK, Boone JM, Nelson TR, et al. Dedicated breast CT: Initial clinical experience. Radiology 2008; 246(3): 725-33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2463070410]
[11]
Shah JP, Mann SD, McKinley RL, et al. Design of a nested SPECT-CT system with fully suspended CT sub-system for dedicated breast imaging. Phys Med Imag 2014; 2014: 1543-8.
[12]
Shah JP, Mann SD, McKinley RL, et al. Design of a nested SPECTCT system with fully suspended CT sub-system for dedicated breast imaging. Proc SPIE 9033, Medical Imaging 2014 Phys Med Imag, 90335O 2014; 1543-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.2043739]
[13]
Crotty DJ, Cutler SJ, McKinley RL, et al. Improved chest wall imaging through combined complex trajectories in dedicated dual modality SPECT-CT breast molecular imaging. 2008 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record. Dresden, Germany. 2008; pp. 5650-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/NSSMIC.2008.4774525]
[14]
O’Connell AM, Karellas A, Vedantham S, Kawakyu-O’Connor DT. Newer technologies in breast cancer imaging: Dedicated cone-beam breast computed tomography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2018; 39(1): 106-13.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2017.09.001] [PMID: 29317032]
[15]
Ma W, Li J, Chen S, et al. Correlation between contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast computed tomography features and prognostic staging in breast cancer. Br J Radiol 2022; 95(1132): 20210466.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20210466] [PMID: 34930038]
[16]
Chen S, Li S, Zhou C, et al. Assessment of cone-beam breast computed tomography for predicting pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: A prospective study. J Oncol 2022 2022; 4(29): 1-13.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/9321763] [PMID: 35528237]
[17]
Desperito E, Schwartz L, Capaccione KM, et al. Chest CT for Breast Cancer Diagnosis 2022; 12: 1699.
[18]
Kang W, Zhong W, Su D. The cone-beam breast computed tomography characteristics of breast non-mass enhancement lesions. Acta Radiol 2021; 62(10): 1298-308.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0284185120963923]
[19]
Li J, Zhong G, Wang K, Kang W, Wei W. Tumor-to-gland volume ratio versus tumor-to-breast ratio as measured on CBBCT: Possible predictors of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer Manag Res 2021; 13: 4463-71.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S312288] [PMID: 34113172]
[20]
Vedantham S, Shi L, Karellas A, O’Connell AM, Conover DL. Personalized estimates of radiation dose from dedicated breast CT in a diagnostic population and comparison with diagnostic mammography. Phys Med Biol 2013; 58(22): 7921-36.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/58/22/7921] [PMID: 24165162]
[21]
Spak DA, Plaxco JS, Santiago L, et al. BI-RADS® fifth edition: A summary of changes. Diagn Interv Imaging 2017; 98(3): 179-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2017.01.001]
[22]
Prionas ND, Lindfors KK, Ray S, et al. Contrast-enhanced dedicated breast CT: Initial clinical experience. Radiology 2010; 256(3): 714-23.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10092311] [PMID: 20720067]
[23]
O’Connell AM, Karellas A, Vedantham S. The potential role of dedicated 3D breast CT as a diagnostic tool: Review and early clinical examples. Breast J 2014; 20(6): 592-605.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12327] [PMID: 25199995]
[24]
Wieler J, Berger N, Frauenfelder T, Marcon M, Boss A. Breast density in dedicated breast computed tomography. Medicine 2021; 100(18): e25844.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000025844] [PMID: 33950998]
[25]
Vedantham S, Shi L, Karellas A, O’Connell AM. Dedicated breast CT: Fibroglandular volume measurements in a diagnostic population. Med Phys 2012; 39(12): 7317-28.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.4765050] [PMID: 23231281]
[26]
Dessel JV, Huang YU, Nicolielo LU, et al. Accuracy of different cone-beam CT devices for trabecular bone structure analysis: An in vitro study. 2014 European Congress of Dento-Maxillo Facial Radiology Junior meeting. Umea, Sweden. 2014. https://lirias.kuleuven.be/1662947?limo=0
[27]
Tseng HW, Karellas A, Vedantham S. Cone-beam breast CT using an offset detector: Effect of detector offset and image reconstruction algorithm. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67(8): 085008.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac5fe1] [PMID: 35316793]
[28]
Ghazi P, Youssefian S, Ghazi T. A novel hardware duo of beam modulation and shielding to reduce scatter acquisition and dose in cone‐beam breast CT. Med Phys 2022; 49(1): 169-85.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.15374] [PMID: 34825715]
[29]
Hatamikia S, Biguri A, Herl G, et al. Source-detector trajectory optimization in cone-beam computed tomography: A comprehensive review on today’s state-of-the-art. Phys Med Biol 2022; 67(16): 16TR03.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac8590] [PMID: 35905731]
[30]
Shah JP, Mann SD, McKinley RL, et al. Three dimensional dose distribution comparison of simple and complex acquisition trajectories in dedicated breast CT. Med Phys 2015; 42(8): 4497-510.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.4923169]
[31]
Kwan AL, Boone JM. Evaluation of x-ray scatter properties in a dedicated cone-beam breast CT scanner. Med Phys 2005; 32(9): 2967-75.

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy