1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Comparison of breast density measured on MR images acquired using fat-suppressed versus nonfat-suppressed sequencesa)
a)This study was conducted at Center for Functional Onco-Imaging, School of Medicine, University of California Irvine
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.3646756
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/11/10.1118/1.3646756
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/11/10.1118/1.3646756

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Anatomical landmark on axial, precontrast fat-suppressed and nonfat-suppressed images. The fat-suppressed imaging sequence was a 3D gradient echo with SPAIR fat-suppression, with TR = 6.20 ms, TE = 1.26 ms, flip angle = 12°, matrix size = 480 × 480, FOV = 31–38 cm, slice thickness = 1 mm, and 160 axial slices. The nonfat-suppressed sequence was a 2D turbo spin-echo with TR = 800 ms, TE = 8.6 ms, flip angle = 90°, matrix size = 480 × 480, FOV = 31–38 cm, slice thickness = 2 mm, and 84 axial slices. The spatial location 5 mm posterior to the dorsal margin of the sternum, indicated by the arrow, is used as the point through which a horizontal line is drawn (a). The nonbreast tissue is excluded (b), resulting in defined breast tissue (c). The contrast between breast tissue and the pectoral muscle on both fat-suppressed and nonfat-suppressed images is very clear, showing reverse signal intensities, which allows a successful segmentation to remove the pectoral muscle on both sets of images.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

An example of density segmentation on a “Central” type breast of a 39-year-old patient, showing confined fibroglandular tissue surrounded by fatty tissue. The contrast between fibroglandular tissue and fatty tissue is strong on both sets of images. On nonfat-suppressed images, the fibroglandular tissue is dark; on fat-suppressed images, the fibroglandular tissue is bright and nearly mirrored and reversed. Some subtle differences exist on the segmented fibroglandular tissues, but the quality is acceptable on both sets of images without obvious errors. Compared with the original image, the downsampled image is blurred, yet the contrast remains very strong for segmentation. The measurement results are listed in Table II.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

An example of density segmentation on an “Intermingled” type breast of a 31-year-old patient, showing mixed fibroglandular tissue and fatty tissue. The segmented fibroglandular tissue region is slightly larger on fat-suppressed images. Nevertheless, the quality is acceptable on both sets of images without obvious errors. Compared with the original image, the downsampled image is blurred, yet the contrast remains very strong for segmentation, and the segmentation results are similar. The measurement results are listed in Table II.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Spearman’s Rho between measurements from fat-suppressed and nonfat-suppressed images for (a) breast volume, (b) fibroglandular tissue volume, and (c) percent density. The parameters measured from the fat-suppressed sequence are on the y-axis; from the nonfat-suppressed sequence are on the x-axis. They are highly correlated with p < 0.001. The best-fit line passing through the origin is plotted on the figure, with a slope of 1.0019 for breast volume, 1.0276 for fibroglandular tissue volume, and 1.0247 for percent density. The dotted black line indicates the unity line representing 1:1 correlation. The least squares regression line lies close to the unity line.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Breast volume, fibroglandular tissue volume and percent density measured on fat-suppressed and nonfat-suppressed images in different groups.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Parameters measured on images at original and reduced spatial resolution for cases shown in Figs. 2 and 3.

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Parameters measured on images at original and reduced spatial resolution.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/11/10.1118/1.3646756
2011-10-17
2014-04-19
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Comparison of breast density measured on MR images acquired using fat-suppressed versus nonfat-suppressed sequencesa)
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/11/10.1118/1.3646756
10.1118/1.3646756
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM