Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Image processing algorithms for digital mammography: a pictorial essay.

E D Pisano1, E B Cole, B M Hemminger

  • 1Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514-4226, USA. etpisano@med.unc.edu

Radiographics : a Review Publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc
|September 19, 2000
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluation of a PET Insert for Trimodal Imaging: A Step Toward PET/MRI-Guided Focused Ultrasound.

IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences·2026
Same author

Comparison of radiation dose between 2D digital stereotactic versus digital breast tomosynthesis-guided breast biopsies.

European journal of radiology·2020
Same author

Assessment of disease extent on contrast-enhanced MRI in breast cancer detected at digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography alone.

Clinical radiology·2017
Same author

Breast cancer screening panels continue to confuse the facts and inject their own biases.

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)·2015
Same author

An update on mammography.

Surgical technology international·2015
Same author

Early corticosteroids requirement after the diagnosis of ulcerative colitis diagnosis can predict a more severe long-term course of the disease - a nationwide study of 1035 patients.

Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics·2014
Same journal

Invited Commentary: Postdeployment Monitoring of AI in Radiology: Beyond the Test Set.

Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc·2026
Same journal

Rosai-Dorfman Disease: Imaging and Updates.

Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc·2026
Same journal

Spectrum of Breast Sarcomas with Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation.

Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc·2026
Same journal

Postdeployment Monitoring and Surveillance Methods, Guidelines, and Possibilities for AI in Radiology.

Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc·2026
Same journal

Clinical Correlation for Imaging of Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc·2026
Same journal

Invited Commentary: Three-Piece Inflatable Penile Prosthesis: Imaging Insights Beyond the Operating Room.

Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc·2026
See all related articles

Digital mammography image processing algorithms offer varied contrast manipulation for breast imaging. Each method presents trade-offs, impacting lesion detection and overall image quality in diagnosis and screening.

Area of Science:

  • Radiology
  • Medical Imaging
  • Image Processing

Background:

  • Digital mammography systems utilize image processing algorithms to adjust image contrast.
  • Various display algorithms exist, each with unique benefits and drawbacks for breast imaging tasks.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of different image processing algorithms in digital mammography.
  • To assess the impact of these algorithms on lesion conspicuity, detail preservation, and screening performance.

Main Methods:

  • Review of digital mammography display algorithms including manual intensity windowing, histogram-based windowing, mixture-model windowing, contrast-limited adaptive histogram equalization, unsharp masking, peripheral equalization, and Trex processing.
  • Analysis of how each algorithm affects image contrast, lesion edge visibility, detail preservation, and potential for enhancing nuisance information.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Manual windowing is operator-dependent. Histogram-based methods improve edge conspicuity but lose detail. Mixture-model enhances borders but may obscure dense areas.
  • Contrast-limited adaptive histogram equalization can highlight edges but may increase false positives in screening. Unsharp masking sharpens borders but can alter lesion appearance.
  • Peripheral equalization preserves peripheral details but can flatten non-peripheral contrast. Trex processing visualizes detail and edges but reduces overall contrast.

Conclusions:

  • No single image processing algorithm is optimal for all digital mammography applications.
  • Algorithm selection requires careful consideration of the specific diagnostic or screening task to balance lesion visibility with potential artifacts and information loss.