OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Andrew M. Weiner
  • Vol. 21, Iss. 9 — May. 6, 2013
  • pp: 10572–10589

Wavelet-based noise-model driven denoising algorithm for differential phase contrast mammography

Carolina Arboleda, Zhentian Wang, and Marco Stampanoni  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 21, Issue 9, pp. 10572-10589 (2013)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.21.010572


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (16231 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Traditional mammography can be positively complemented by phase contrast and scattering x-ray imaging, because they can detect subtle differences in the electron density of a material and measure the local small-angle scattering power generated by the microscopic density fluctuations in the specimen, respectively. The grating-based x-ray interferometry technique can produce absorption, differential phase contrast (DPC) and scattering signals of the sample, in parallel, and works well with conventional X-ray sources; thus, it constitutes a promising method for more reliable breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Recently, our team proved that this novel technology can provide images superior to conventional mammography. This new technology was used to image whole native breast samples directly after mastectomy. The images acquired show high potential, but the noise level associated to the DPC and scattering signals is significant, so it is necessary to remove it in order to improve image quality and visualization. The noise models of the three signals have been investigated and the noise variance can be computed. In this work, a wavelet-based denoising algorithm using these noise models is proposed. It was evaluated with both simulated and experimental mammography data. The outcomes demonstrated that our method offers a good denoising quality, while simultaneously preserving the edges and important structural features. Therefore, it can help improve diagnosis and implement further post-processing techniques such as fusion of the three signals acquired.

© 2013 OSA

OCIS Codes
(100.2000) Image processing : Digital image processing
(100.7410) Image processing : Wavelets
(110.3000) Imaging systems : Image quality assessment
(170.3830) Medical optics and biotechnology : Mammography

ToC Category:
Image Processing

History
Original Manuscript: January 29, 2013
Revised Manuscript: March 31, 2013
Manuscript Accepted: April 8, 2013
Published: April 23, 2013

Virtual Issues
Vol. 8, Iss. 6 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Carolina Arboleda, Zhentian Wang, and Marco Stampanoni, "Wavelet-based noise-model driven denoising algorithm for differential phase contrast mammography," Opt. Express 21, 10572-10589 (2013)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-21-9-10572


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. P. Sakellaropoulos, L. Costaridou, and G. Panayiotakis, “A wavelet-based spatially adaptive method for mammographic contrast enhancement,” Phys. Med. Biol.48(6), 787–803 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. M. Stampanoni, Z. Wang, T. Thring, C. David, E. Roessl, M. Trippel, R. Kubik-Huch, G. Singer, M. K. Hohl, and N. Hauser, “The first analysis and clinical evaluation of native breast tissue using differential phase-contrast mmmography,” Invest. Radiol.46(12), 801–806 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. E. Jerhotova, J. Svihlik, and A. Prochazka, “Biomedical image volumes denoising via the wavelet transform,” in Applied Biomedical Engineering, G.D. Gargiulo and A. McEwan, eds. (Intech, 2011), pp 435–458 (2009).
  4. S. Rangarajan, R. Venkataramanan, and R. Shah, “Image denoising using wavelets,” (technical report, 2002).
  5. D. L. Donoho and I. M. Johnstone, “Ideal spatial adaptation by wavelet shrinkage,” Biometrika81(3), 425–455 (2009). [CrossRef]
  6. P. Kenterlis and D. Salonikidis, “Evaluation of wavelet domain methods for image denoising,” (technical report).
  7. S. K. Mohideen, S. A. Perumal, and M. M Sathik, “Image denoising using discrete wavelet transform,” J. Comput. Sci.8(1), 8–11 (2011).
  8. S. G. Chang, B. Yu, and M. Vetterli, “Adaptive wavelet thresholding for image denoising and compression,” IEEE Trans. Image Process.9(9), 1532–1546 (2000). [CrossRef]
  9. G. Y. Chen, T. D. Bui, and A. Krzyzak, “Image denoising using neighbouring wavelet coefficients,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (IEEE, 2004), pp. 917–920.
  10. Y. Jin, E. Angelini, and A. Laine, “Wavelets in medical image processing: denoising, segmentation and registration,” in Handbook of Biomedical Image Analysis, Volume 1: Segmentation models, Part A, J. S. Suri, D.L. Wilson, and S. Laxminarayan, eds. (Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2005), pp. 305–358. [CrossRef]
  11. J.F. Aujol and G. Gilboa, “Constrained and SNR-based solutions for TV-Hilbert space image denoising,” J. Math. Imaging Vision26,217–237 (2006). [CrossRef]
  12. V. Revol, C. Kottler, R. Kaufmann, U. Straumann, and C. Urban, “Noise analysis of grating-based x-ray differential phase contrast imaging,” Rev. Sci. Instrum.81,073709 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. P. Kisilev, D. Shaked, and S. H. Lim, “Noise and signal activity maps for better imaging algorithms,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (IEEE, 2007), pp.117–120.
  14. B. Goossens, A. Pizurica, and W. Philips, “Em-based estimation of spatially variant correlated image noise,” in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (IEEE, 2008), pp. 1744–1747.
  15. S. G. Chang, B. Yu, and M. Vetterli, “Spatially adaptive wavelet thresholding with context modeling for image denoising,” IEEE Trans. Image Process.9(9), 1522–1531 (2000). [CrossRef]
  16. PIHera Piezo Lineartisch manual PI. P-620.1 P-629.1.
  17. M. P. Sampat, Z. Wang, S. Gupta, A. C. Bovik, and M. K. Markey, “Complex wavelet structural similarity: a new image similarity index,” IEEE Trans. Image Process.18(11), 2385–2401 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Z. Wang and A. C. Bovik, “Mean-square error : Love it or leave it?,” IEEE Signal Process Mag.26(1), 98–117 (2009). [CrossRef]
  19. B.M. Priestley, “Evolutionary spectra and non-stationary processes,” J. R. Stat. Soc. Series B27(2), 204–237 (1965).
  20. J. Kaufhold, J. A. Thomas, W. Eberhard, C. E. Galbo, and D. E. Trotter, “A calibration approach to glandular tissue composition estimation in digital mammography,” Med. Phys.29,1867–1880 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited