Skip to main content
Log in

Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization image processing to improve the detection of simulated spiculations in dense mammograms

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this project was to determine whether Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization (CLAHE) improves detection of simulated spiculations in dense mammograms. Lines simulating the appearance of spiculations, a common marker of malignancy when visualized with masses, were embedded in dense mammograms digitized at 50 micron pixels, 12 bits deep. Film images with no CLAHE applied were compared to film images with nine different combinations of clip levels and region sizes applied. A simulated spiculation was embedded in a background of dense breast tissue, with the orientation of the spiculation varied. The key variables involved in each trial included the orientation of the spiculation, contrast level of the spiculation and the CLAHE settings applied to the image. Combining the 10 CLAHE conditions, 4 contrast levels and 4 orientations gave 160 combinations. The trials were constructed by pairing 160 combinations of key variables with 40 backgrounds. Twenty student observers were asked to detect the orientation of the spiculation in the image. There was a statistically significant improvement in detection performance for spiculations with CLAHE over unenhanced images when the region size was set at 32 with a clip level of 2, and when the region size was set at 32 with a clip level of 4. The selected CLAHE settings should be tested in the clinic with digital mammograms to determine whether detection of spiculations associated with masses detected at mammography can be improved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Homer MJ: Mammographic Interpretation: A practical approach. New York, NY, McGraw Hill, 1991, pp 4–5

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rosenman J, Roe CA, Cromartie R, et al: Portal Film enhancement: Technique and clinical utility. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Physics 25:333–338, 1993

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Schmidt RA, Nishikawa RM: Clinical Use of Digital Mammography: The Present and the Prospects. J Digit Imaging 8:74–79, 1995 (suppl 1)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Shtern F: Digital mammography and related technologies: A perspective from the National Cancer Institute. Radiology 183:629–30, 1992

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Feig SA, Yaffe MJ: Current status of digital mammography. Sem Ultrasound, CT and MR 17:424–443, 1997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al: Does intensity windowing improve the detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms? J Digit Imaging 10:79–84, 1997

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al: The effect of intensity windowing as an image processing tool in the detection of simulated masses embedded in digitized mammograms. J Digit Imaging 10:174–182, 1997

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Puff DT, Pisano ED, Muller KE, et al: A method for determination of optimal image enhancement for the detection of mammographic abnormalities. J Digit Imaging 7:161–171, 1994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. McSweeney MB, Sprawls P, Egan RL: Enhanced image mammography. AJR Am J Roentgerol 140:9–14, 1983

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Smathers RL, Bush E, Drace J, et al: Mammographic microcalcifications: Detection with xerography, screen film, and digitized film display. Radiology 159:673–677, 1986

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chan HP, Doi K, Galhorta S, et al: Image feature analysis and computer-aided diagnosis in digital radiography: I. Automated detection of microcalcifications in mammography. Med Phys 14:538–547, 1987

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chan HP, Vyborny CJ, MacMahon H, et al: Digital mammography ROC studies of the effects of pixel size and unsharp-mask filtering on the detection of subtle microcalcifications. Invest Radiol 22:581–589, 1987

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hale DA, Cook JF, Baniqued Z, et al: Selective digital enhancement of conventional film mammography. J Surg Onc 55:42–46, 1994

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Yin F, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, et al: Comparison of bilateral-subtraction and single-image processing techniques in the computerized detection of mammographic masses. Invest Radiol 28:473–781, 1993

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yin F, Giger M, Doi K, et al: Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: Analysis of bilateral subtraction images. Med Phys 18:955–963, 1991

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kallergi M, Clarke LP, Qian W, et al: Interpretation of calcifications in screen/film, digitized and wavelet-enhanced monitor-displayed mammograms: A receiver-operating characteristic study. Acad Radiol 3:285–293, 1996

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pizer S, Zimmerman JB, Staab EV: Adaptive grey level assignment in CT scan display. J Comput Assist Tomogr 8:300–305, 1984

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pizer SM: Psychovisual issues in the display of medical images, in Hoehne KH (ed): Pictoral Information Systems in Medicine. Berlin, Germany, Springer-Verlag, 1985, pp 211–234

    Google Scholar 

  19. Revesz G, Kundel HL, Graber MD: The influence of structured noise on the detection of radiologic abnormalities. Invest Radiol 9:479–486, 1974

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kundel HL, Revesz G: Lesion conspicuity, structured noise and film reader error. AJR Am J Roentgenol 126:1233–1238, 1976

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Revesz G, Kundel HL: Psychophysical studies of detection errors in chest radiology. Radiology 128:559–562, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  22. MacMillan NA, Creelman CD: Detection theory: A user guide. Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press, 1991, pp 135–136

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported by NIH PO1-CA 47982, NIH RO1-65583 and DOD DAMD 17-94-J-4345.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pisano, E.D., Zong, S., Hemminger, B.M. et al. Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization image processing to improve the detection of simulated spiculations in dense mammograms. J Digit Imaging 11, 193 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03178082

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03178082

Key Words

Navigation