Abstract: Purpose: Initial auto-adjustment of the window level WL and width WW applied to mammographic images. The proposed intensity windowing (IW) method is based on the maximization of the mutual information (MI) between a perceptual decomposition of the original 12-bit sources and their screen displayed 8-bit version. Besides zoom, color inversion and panning operations, IW is the most commonly performed task in daily screening and has a direct impact on diagnosis and the time involved in the process. Methods: The authors present a human visual system and perception-based algorithm named GRAIL (Gabor-relying adjustment of image levels). GRAIL initially measures a mammogram's quality based on the MI between the original instance and its Gabor-filtered derivations. From this point on, the algorithm performs an automatic intensity windowing process that outputs the WL/WW that best displays each mammogram for screening. GRAIL starts with the default, high contrast, wide dynamic range 12-bit data, and then maximizes the graphical information presented in ordinary 8-bit displays. Tests have been carried out with several mammogram databases. They comprise correlations and an ANOVA analysis with the manual IW levels established by a group of radiologists. A complete MATLAB implementation of GRAIL is available at . Results: Auto-leveled images show superior quality both perceptually and objectively compared to their full intensity range and compared to the application of other common methods like global contrast stretching (GCS). The correlations between the human determined intensity values and the ones estimated by our method surpass that of GCS. The ANOVA analysis with the upper intensity thresholds also reveals a similar outcome. GRAIL has also proven to specially perform better with images that contain micro-calcifications and/or foreign X-ray-opaque elements and with healthy BI-RADS A-type mammograms. It can also speed up the initial screening time by a mean of 4.5 s per image. Conclusions: A novel methodology is introduced that enables a quality-driven balancing of the WL/WW of mammographic images. This correction seeks the representation that maximizes the amount of graphical information contained in each image. The presented technique can contribute to the diagnosis and the overall efficiency of the breast screening session by suggesting, at the beginning, an optimal and customized windowing setting for each mammogram.

Abstract: Purpose: A surface electronic brachytherapy (EBT) device is in fact an x-ray source collimated with specific applicators. Low-energy (<100 kVp) x-ray beam dosimetry faces several challenges that need to be addressed. A number of calibration protocols have been published for x-ray beam dosimetry. The media in which measurements are performed are the fundamental difference between them. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface dose rate of a low-energy x-ray source with small field applicators using different calibration standards and different small-volume ionization chambers, comparing the values and uncertainties of each methodology. Methods: The surface dose rate of the EBT unit Esteya (Elekta Brachytherapy, The Netherlands), a 69.5 kVp x-ray source with applicators of 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 mm diameter, was evaluated using the AAPM TG-61 (based on air kerma) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) TRS-398 (based on absorbed dose to water) dosimetry protocols for low-energy photon beams. A plane parallel T34013 ionization chamber (PTW Freiburg, Germany) calibrated in terms of both absorbed dose to water and air kerma was used to compare the two dosimetry protocols. Another PTW chamber of the same model was used to evaluate the reproducibility between these chambers. Measurements were also performed with two different Exradin A20 (Standard Imaging, Inc., Middleton, WI) chambers calibrated in terms of air kerma. Results: Differences between surface dose rates measured in air and in water using the T34013 chamber range from 1.6% to 3.3%. No field size dependence has been observed. Differences are below 3.7% when measurements with the A20 and the T34013 chambers calibrated in air are compared. Estimated uncertainty (with coverage factor k = 1) for the T34013 chamber calibrated in water is 2.2%-2.4%, whereas it increases to 2.5% and 2.7% for the A20 and T34013 chambers calibrated in air, respectively. The output factors, measured with the PTW chambers, differ by less than 1.1% for any applicator size when compared to the output factors that were measured with the A20 chamber. Conclusions: Measurements using both dosimetric protocols are consistent, once the overall uncertainties are considered. There is also consistency between measurements performed with both chambers calibrated in air. Both the T34013 and A20 chambers have negligible stem effect. Any x-ray surface brachytherapy system, including Esteya, can be characterized using either one of these calibration protocols and ionization chambers. Having less correction factors, lower uncertainty, and based on measurements, performed in closer to clinical conditions, the TRS-398 protocol seems to be the preferred option.

Abstract: BackgroundNon-melanoma skin cancer is one of the most common types of cancer and one of the main approaches is brachytherapy. For small lesions, the treatment of this cancer with brachytherapy can be done with two commercial applicators, one of these is the Large Field Valencia Applicators (LFVA).PurposeThe aim of this study is to test the capabilities of the LFVA to use clinically 60Co sources instead of the 192Ir ones. This study was designed for the same dwell positions and weights for both sources.MethodsThe Penelope Monte Carlo code was used to evaluate dose distribution in a water phantom when a 60Co source is considered. The LFVA design and the optimized dwell weights reported for the case of 192Ir are maintained with the only exception of the dwell weight of the central position, that was increased. 2D dose distributions, field flatness, symmetry and the leakage dose distribution around the applicator were calculated.ResultsWhen comparing the dose distributions of both sources, field flatness and symmetry remain unchanged. The only evident difference is an increase of the penumbra regions for all depths when using the 60Co source. Regarding leakage, the maximum dose within the air volume surrounding the applicator is in the order of 20% of the prescription dose for the 60Co source, but it decreases to less than 5% at about 1 cm distance.ConclusionsFlatness and symmetry remains unaltered as compared with 192Ir sources, while an increase in leakage has been observed. This proves the feasibility of using the LFVA in a larger range of clinical applications.