PPTS Portal Home

Revised 2022 (Resolution 46)

Document Navigator

Document Navigator

ACR–AAPM–SIIM PRACTICE PARAMETER FOR DETERMINANTS OF IMAGE QUALITY IN MAMMOGRAPHY

PREAMBLE

I.

INTRODUCTION

II.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

III.

MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGE ACQUISITION

III.

MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGE ACQUISITION

A.

Anatomic Coverage

III.

MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGE ACQUISITION

B.

Spatial Resolution

III.

MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGE ACQUISITION

C.

Contrast resolution

III.

MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGE ACQUISITION

D.

Radiographic image noise

III.

MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGE ACQUISITION

E.

Artifiacts in FFDM

IV.

MAMMOGRAPHY IMAGE PROCESSING

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

A.

Hardcopy Printing

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

B.

Softcopy Display Devices

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

B.

Softcopy Display Devices

1.

Luminance Response

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

B.

Softcopy Display Devices

2.

Contrast

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

B.

Softcopy Display Devices

3.

Bit depth

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

B.

Softcopy Display Devices

4.

Digital image matrix size and display size

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

B.

Softcopy Display Devices

5.

Other softcopy display characteristics

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

C.

Image Presentation Issues

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

D.

Computer-aided detection (CAD)

V.

MAMMOGRAPHIC IMAGE DISPLAY

E.

Reading Environment

VI.

TRANSMISSION, STORAGE, AND RETRIEVAL

VI.

TRANSMISSION, STORAGE, AND RETRIEVAL

A.

Mammography Image and Data Types

VI.

TRANSMISSION, STORAGE, AND RETRIEVAL

B.

Workstation

VI.

TRANSMISSION, STORAGE, AND RETRIEVAL

C.

Archive

VI.

TRANSMISSION, STORAGE, AND RETRIEVAL

D.

Image and Data Compression

VI.

TRANSMISSION, STORAGE, AND RETRIEVAL

E.

Legal Challenges

VII.

QUALITY CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

REFERENCES

1. Avrin D, Morin R, Piraino D, et al. Storage, transmission, and retrieval of digital mammography, including recommendations on image compression. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Aug;3(8):609-14.
2. Siegel E, Krupinski E, Samei E, et al. Digital mammography image quality: image display. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Aug;3(8):615-27.
3. Williams MB, Yaffe MJ, Maidment AD, Martin MC, Seibert JA, Pisano ED. Image quality in digital mammography: image acquisition. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Aug;3(8):589-608.
4. Radiological Society of North America. Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise - IHE Radiology. Available at: http://www.ihe.net/Radiology/.
5. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Stereotactic/Tomosynthesis-Guided Breast Interventional Procedures. Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=65+&releaseId=2
6. Krupinski EA, Williams MB, Andriole K, et al. Digital radiography image quality: image processing and display. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007 Jun;4(6):389-400.
7. Williams MB, Krupinski EA, Strauss KJ, et al. Digital radiography image quality: image acquisition. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007 Jun;4(6):371-88.
8. American College of Radiology. ACR-AAPM-SIIM Practice Parameter for Digital Radiography. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=135+&releaseId=2
9. Berns EA, Pfeiffer DE, Butler PF, al e. Digital Mammography Quality Control Manual. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2018.
10. Medical Imaging: the Assessment of Image Quality. Bethesda, Md: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; ICRU Report 54; 1996.
11. Food and Drug Administration. Mammography quality standards; final rule. Available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/03/10/2023-04550/mammography-quality-standards-act.
12. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Screening and Diagnostic Mammography. Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=8+&releaseId=2
13. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Frequently asked questions about DBT and MQSA training requirements. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/facility-certification-and-inspection-mqsa/frequently-asked-questions-about-dbt-and-mqsa-training-requirements.
14. Bloomquist AK, Yaffe MJ, Pisano ED, et al. Quality control for digital mammography in the ACRIN DMIST trial: part I. Med Phys. 2006 Mar;33(3):719-36.
15. Sechopoulos I. A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part I. The image acquisition process. Med Phys. 2013 Jan;40(1):014301.
16. Jochelson MS, Lobbes MBI. Contrast-enhanced Mammography: State of the Art. Radiology. 2021 Apr;299(1):36-48.
17. Rezentes PS, de Almeida A, Barnes GT. Mammography grid performance. Radiology. 1999 Jan;210(1):227-32.
18. Wagner AJ. Contrast and grid performance in mammography. In: Barnes GT, Frey GD, eds. Screen Film Mammography: Imaging Considerations and Medical Physics Responsibilities. Madison, Wis: Medical Physics Publishing; 1991:115-34.
19. Barnes GT. Radiographic mottle: a comprehensive theory. Med Phys. 1982;9(5):656-67.
20. Nishikawa RM, Yaffe MJ. Signal-to-noise properties of mammographic film-screen systems. Med Phys. 1985;12(1):32-9.
21. Swank RK. Absorption and noise in X-ray phosphors. J Appl Phys 1973;44:4199-203.
22. Freer PE.. Mammographic breast density: impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening. [Review]. Radiographics. 35(2):302-15, 2015 Mar-Apr.
23. Geiser WR, Haygood TM, Santiago L, Stephens T, Thames D, Whitman GJ. Challenges in mammography: part 1, artifacts in digital mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Dec;197(6):W1023-30.
24. Baker JA, Rosen EL, Crockett MM, Lo JY. Accuracy of segmentation of a commercial computer-aided detection system for mammography. Radiology. 2005 May;235(2):385-90.
25. Baker JA, Lo JY. Breast tomosynthesis: state-of-the-art and review of the literature. Acad Radiol. 2011 Oct;18(10):1298-310.
26. Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Bick U, Hamm B. Reduced-dose digital mammography of skin calcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Feb;178(2):473-4.
27. Krupinski EA, Nodine CF, Kundel HL. A perceptually based method for enhancing pulmonary nodule recognition. Invest Radiol. 1993 Apr;28(4):289-94.
28. Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E. Dose reduction in full-field digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study. Br J Radiol. 2003 Jul;76(907):478-82.
29. Kobayashi M. Image Optimization by Dynamic Range Control Processing. Springfield, Va: Society for Imaging Science and Technology; 47th Annual Conference; 1993.
30. Ratanaprasatporn L, Chikarmane SA, Giess CS. Strengths and Weaknesses of Synthetic Mammography in Screening. [Review]. Radiographics. 37(7):1913-1927, 2017 Nov-Dec.
31. Badano A, Flynn MJ, Kanicki J. High-Fidelity Medical Imaging Displays. Bellingham, Wash: SPIE Press; 2004.
32. Badano A, Flynn MJ, Martin S, Kanicki J. Angular dependence of the luminance and contrast in medical monochrome liquid crystal displays. Med Phys. 2003 Oct;30(10):2602-13.
33. Specifications for Medical Diagnostic Imaging Test Pattern for Television Monitors and Hard-Copy Recording Cameras. New York, NY: Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers; 1991.
34. Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals. Part 3: Visual Display Requirements. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; ISO 9241-3; 1992.
35. Seibert JA, Boone J, Lindfors KK. Flat-field correction techniques for digital detectors, Proc. SPIE 3336. Medical Imaging 1998;348.
36. Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals. Part 2: Ergonomic Requirements for Flat Panel Displays. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; ISO 13406-2; 2001.
37. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) Part 14: grayscale standard display function. Available at: http://dicom.nema.org/Dicom/2011/11_14PU.PDF.
38. Imaging Quality Assurance in X-Ray Diagnostics, Acceptance Testing for Image Display Devices. Munich, Germany: Deutsches Institute for Normung; 2001.
39. Quality Control Manual Template for Manufacturers of Displays and Workstations Devices Labeled for Final Interpretation in Full-Field Digital Mammography. Rosslyn, Va: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; XR 22-2006; 2006.
40. Quality Control Manual Template for Manufacturers of Hardcopy Output Devices Labeled for Final Interpretation in Full-Field Digital Mammography. Rosslyn, Va: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; XR 23-2006; 2006.
41. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Printers and the evolution of mammography. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/MammographyQualityStandardsActandProgram/FacilityScorecard/ucm473469.htm. .
42. Hendrick RE, Bassett L, Botso MA, et al. The ACR Mammography Quality Control Manual. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology; 1999.
43. Samei E, Wright SL. Viewing angle performance of medical liquid crystal displays. Med Phys. 2006 Mar;33(3):645-54.
44. Gray JE, Anderson WF, Shaw CC, Shepard SJ, Zeremba LA, Lin PJ. Multiformat video and laser cameras: history, design considerations, acceptance testing, and quality control. Report of AAPM Diagnostic X-Ray Imaging Committee Task Group No. 1. Med Phys. 1993;20(2 Pt 1):427-38.
45. Assessment of Display Performance for Medical Imaging Systems. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine; AAPM Report 003; 2005.
46. Burgess AE, Kang H. Incomplete skin representation in digital mammograms. Med Phys. 2004 Oct;31(10):2834-8.
47. Goo JM, Choi JY, Im JG, et al. Effect of monitor luminance and ambient light on observer performance in soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs. Radiology. 2004 Sep;232(3):762-6.
48. Gray JE. Use of the SMPTE test pattern in picture archiving and communication systems. J Digit Imaging. 1992 Feb;5(1):54-8.
49. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AAPM Task Group 270 - Display Quality Assurance. Available at: https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_270.pdf. .
51. Samei E, Badano A, Chakraborty D, et al. Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: executive summary of AAPM TG18 report. Med Phys. 2005 Apr;32(4):1205-25.
52. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Under what circumstances must our medical physicist actually visit our facility in order to successfully carry out his/her responsibility Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/MammographyQualityStandardsActandProgram/Guidance/PolicyGuidanceHelpSystem/ucm143140.htm.
53. American College of Radiology. ACR-AAPM-SIIM Technical Standard for Electronic Practice of Medical Imaging. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=136+&releaseId=2
54. Morra L, Sacchetto D, Durando M, et al. Breast Cancer: Computer-aided Detection with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. Radiology. 277(1):56-63, 2015 Oct.
55. Horii SC, Horii HN, Mun SK, Benson HR, Zeman RK. Environmental designs for reading from imaging work stations: ergonomic and architectural features. J Digit Imaging. 1989 Aug;2(3):156-62.
56. Siddiqui KM, Chia S, Knight N, Siegel EL. Design and ergonomic considerations for the filmless environment. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Jun;3(6):456-67.
57. Brennan PC, McEntee M, Evanoff M, Phillips P, O'Connor WT, Manning DJ. Ambient lighting: effect of illumination on soft-copy viewing of radiographs of the wrist. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Feb;188(2):W177-80.
58. Pollard BJ, Samei E, Chawla AS, et al. The effects of ambient lighting in chest radiology reading rooms. J Digit Imaging. 2012 Aug;25(4):520-6.
59. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) Policy Guidance Help System. http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/MammographyQualityStandardsActandProgram/Guidance/PolicyGuidanceHelpSystem/default.htm.
60. Polianskii VB, Ruderman GL. [Effects of the intersensory action of sound on the performance of a simple motor reaction to light in the cat]. Fiziol Zh SSSR Im I M Sechenova. 1988 Aug;74(8):1102-8.