Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 11, 2026

Construction of a Preclinical Multimodality Phantom Using Tissue-mimicking Materials for Quality Assurance in Tumor Size Measurement
Published on: July 29, 2013
Performance of dual-energy subtraction in contrast-enhanced mammography for three different manufacturers: a phantom
Gisella Gennaro1, Giulia Vatteroni2,3, Daniela Bernardi2,3
1Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV), IRCCS, Padua, Italy. gisella.gennaro@iov.veneto.it.
Background:
Dual-energy subtraction (DES) imaging is critical in contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), as the recombination of low-energy (LE) and high-energy (HE) images produces contrast enhancement while reducing anatomical noise. The study's purpose was to compare the performance of the DES algorithm among three different CEM systems using a commercial phantom.
Methods:
A CIRS Model 022 phantom, designed for CEM, was acquired using all available automatic exposure modes (AECs) with three CEM systems from three different manufacturers (CEM1, CEM2, and CEM3). Three studies were acquired for each system/AEC mode to measure both radiation dose and image quality metrics, including estimation of measurement error. The mean glandular dose (MGD) calculated over the three acquisitions was used as the dosimetry index, while contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was obtained from LE and HE images and DES images and used as an image quality metric.
Results:
On average, the CNR of LE images of CEM1 was 2.3 times higher than that of CEM2 and 2.7 times higher than that of CEM3. For HE images, the CNR of CEM1 was 2.7 and 3.5 times higher than that of CEM2 and CEM3, respectively. The CNR remained predominantly higher for CEM1 even when measured from DES images, followed by CEM2 and then CEM3. CEM1 delivered the lowest MGD (2.34 ± 0.03 mGy), followed by CEM3 (2.53 ± 0.02 mGy) in default AEC mode, and CEM2 (3.50 ± 0.05 mGy). The doses of CEM2 and CEM3 increased by 49.6% and 8.0% compared with CEM1, respectively.
Conclusion:
One system outperformed others in DES algorithms, providing higher CNR at lower doses.
Relevance Statement:
This phantom study highlighted the variability in performance among the DES algorithms used by different CEM systems, showing that these differences can be translated in terms of variations in contrast enhancement and radiation dose.
Key Points:
DES images, obtained by recombining LE and HE images, have a major role in CEM. Differences in radiation dose among CEM systems were between 8.0% and 49.6%. One DES algorithm achieved superior technical performance, providing higher CNR values at a lower radiation dose.
More Related Videos
11:05Tissue-simulating Phantoms for Assessing Potential Near-infrared Fluorescence Imaging Applications in Breast Cancer Surgery
Published on: September 19, 2014
08:41Patient-Specific Polyvinyl Alcohol Phantom Fabrication with Ultrasound and X-Ray Contrast for Brain Tumor Surgery Planning
Published on: July 14, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies II: Positron Emission Tomography and Scintigraphy
Fundamental Principles of PET
Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography