Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 20, 2026
Detection of Architectural Distortion in Prior Mammograms via Analysis of Oriented Patterns
Published on: August 30, 2013
A comparison study of image features between FFDM and film mammogram images
Hao Jing1, Yongyi Yang, Miles N Wernick
1Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616, USA.
Purpose:
This work is to provide a direct, quantitative comparison of image features measured by film and full-field digital mammography (FFDM). The purpose is to investigate whether there is any systematic difference between film and FFDM in terms of quantitative image features and their influence on the performance of a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system.
Methods:
The authors make use of a set of matched film-FFDM image pairs acquired from cadaver breast specimens with simulated microcalcifications consisting of bone and teeth fragments using both a GE digital mammography system and a screen-film system. To quantify the image features, the authors consider a set of 12 textural features of lesion regions and six image features of individual microcalcifications (MCs). The authors first conduct a direct comparison on these quantitative features extracted from film and FFDM images. The authors then study the performance of a CAD classifier for discriminating between MCs and false positives (FPs) when the classifier is trained on images of different types (film, FFDM, or both).
Results:
For all the features considered, the quantitative results show a high degree of correlation between features extracted from film and FFDM, with the correlation coefficients ranging from 0.7326 to 0.9602 for the different features. Based on a Fisher sign rank test, there was no significant difference observed between the features extracted from film and those from FFDM. For both MC detection and discrimination of FPs from MCs, FFDM had a slight but statistically significant advantage in performance; however, when the classifiers were trained on different types of images (acquired with FFDM or SFM) for discriminating MCs from FPs, there was little difference.
Conclusions:
The results indicate good agreement between film and FFDM in quantitative image features. While FFDM images provide better detection performance in MCs, FFDM and film images may be interchangeable for the purposes of training CAD algorithms, and a single CAD algorithm may be applied to either type of images.
