Digital Tomosynthesis: Applications in General Radiography
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/ROJ-4-128Keywords:
Digital tomosynthesis (DT), Radiography, Medical imaging, Emerging imaging, Whole body imaging, Tomosynthesis, Future prospectsAbstract
Aim
Digital tomosynthesis (DT) is a novel imaging modality that has yet to be adopted widespread in Australia, but has potential to
enhance patient outcomes both in diagnosis and reducing radiation dose. A review of the literature was performed to develop an
introduction to digital tomosynthesis, and identify its uses and viability in general radiography.
Methods
Scopus, Ovid, MEDLINE and PubMed were utilised initially to identify literature published within 5-years, using several search
terms linked with AND and OR. Articles were assessed according to specific guidelines, and categorised. Journal databases, medical
imaging vendor websites, and article references were also evaluated for relevant information.
Results
Based on tomography, digital tomosynthesis is offered as an add-on to general radiographic equipment from general electric
(GE), ShimadzuTM and Fujifilm. It’s technology involves a sweep of the X-ray tube over a limited angle onto a stationary flat panel
detector. The data is reconstructed to produce multiple slices in the acquisition plane, providing limited depth resolution in a radiographic
setting, at a substantially lower dose to computerized tomography (CT) examinations. It’s use has been highlighted in
orthopaedic imaging, in detecting occult fractures when radiography has ambiguous results. Additional uses are mainly in surveillance;
digital tomosynthesis has higher sensitivity and similar specificity to radiography, and thus can be used to monitor solid lung
nodules, nephrolithiasis and deterioration of arthritic conditions.
Conclusion
At a lower cost to CT, digital tomosynthesis has the potential to become a bridging modality from radiography to both save patient
dose and reduce their overall waiting times. However, more large-scale studies are required to confirm this.
References
Michell MJ, Batohi B. Role of tomosynthesis in breast imaging going forward. Clin Radiol. 2018; 73(4): 358-371. doi: 10.1016/j. crad.2018.01.001
Dobbins JT, 3rd, Godfrey DJ. Digital X-ray tomosynthesis: current state of the art and clinical potential. Phys Med Biol. 2003; 48(19): R65-R106. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/48/19/r01 7
Machida H, Yuhara T, Mori T, Ueno E, Moribe Y, Sabol JM. Optimizing parameters for flat-panel detector digital tomosynthe-sis. Radiographics. 2010; 30(2): 549-562. doi: 10.1148/rg.302095097
Tingberg A. X-ray tomosynthesis: a review of its use for breast Systematic Review | Volume 4 | Issue 1| Yew S et al and chest imaging. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2010; 139(1-3): 100-107. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncq099
Machida H, Yuhara T, Tamura M, et al. Whole-body clinical ap-plications of digital tomosynthesis. Radiographics. 2016; 36(3): 735- 750. doi: 10.1148/rg.2016150184
Deller T, Jabri KN, Sabol JM, et al. Effect of acquisition param-eters on image quality in digital tomosynthesis. In: Medical Imaging. San Diego, CA, USA: Physics of Medical Imaging; 2007.
Ferrari A, Bertolaccini L, Solli P, Di Salvia PO, Scaradozzi D. Digital chest tomosynthesis: the 2017 updated review of an emerg-ing application. Ann Transl Med. 2018; 6(5): 91. doi: 10.21037/ atm.2017.08.18
Adamo SH, Cain MS, Mitroff SR. An individual differences ap-proach to multiple-target visual search errors: How search errors relate to different characteristics of attention. Vision Res. 2017; 141: 258-265. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2016.10.010
GE Healthcare. VolumeRAD tomosynthesis: Superior de-tectability of lung nodules compared to a chest X-ray. Web site. http://www3.gehealthcare.com.pa/~/media/documents/us-global/products/radiography/brochure/advanced-applications/ gehc-brochure_radiography-volumerad-tomosynthesis.pdf. Ac-cessed February 1, 2020.
Baba T. Experiences Using RADspeed Pro EDGE for To-mosynthesis. Web site. https://www.shimadzu.com/med/sites/ shimadzu.com.med/files/products/radio/od0gjn00000025sa-img/d_p28-32_RAD_cli_imamura_83_E.pdf. Accessed February 1, 2020.
Fujifilm. FDR Visionary Suite. Web site. https://www.fujifil-musa.com/products/medical/digital-x-ray/dr-rooms/FDR-vi-sionary-suite/#overview. Accessed February 1, 2020.
Izumi T, Sakamoto A, Kawamata M, et al. The role of tomo-synthesis imaging at our institute and X-ray dose optimization. Web site. https://www.shimadzu.com/med/sites/shimadzu.com. med/files/literature/fluoro/k25cur0000003yfx-att/d_p43-47_ RF_cli_oosaka-gan_83_E.PDF. Accessed February 1, 2020.
Meltzer C, Båth M, Kheddache S, Ásgeirsdóttir H, Gilljam M, Johnsson ÅA. Visibility of structures of relevance for patients with cystic fibrosis in chest tomosynthesis: Influence of anatomi-cal location and observer experience. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016; 169(1-4): 177-187. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncv556
Sharma M, Sandhu MS, Gorsi U, Gupta D, Khandelwal N. Role of digital tomosynthesis and dual energy subtraction digital radi-ography in detection of parenchymal lesions in active pulmonary tuberculosis. Eur J Radiol. 2015; 84(9): 1820-1827. doi: 10.1016/j. ejrad.2015.05.031
Lee G, Jeong YJ, Kim KI, et al. Comparison of chest digital tomosynthesis and chest radiography for detection of asbestos-related pleuropulmonary disease. Clin Radiol. 2013; 68(4): 376-382. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2012.05.022
Bath M, Svalkvist A, von Wrangel A, Rismyhr-Olsson H, Ced-erblad A. Effective dose to patients from chest examinations with tomosynthesis. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2010; 139(1-3): 153-158. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncq092
Hwang HS, Chung MJ, Lee KS. Digital tomosynthesis of the chest: Comparison of patient exposure dose and image quality be-tween standard default setting and low dose setting. Korean J Radiol. 2013; 14(3): 525-531. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2013.14.3.525
Quaia E, Baratella E, Poillucci G, Kus S, Cioffi V, Cova MA. Digital tomosynthesis as a problem-solving imaging technique to confirm or exclude potential thoracic lesions based on chest X-ray radiography. Acad Radiol. 2013; 20(5): 546-553. doi: 10.1016/j. acra.2012.12.009
Quaia E, Baratella E, Poillucci G, Gennari AG, Cova MA. Diagnostic impact of digital tomosynthesis in oncologic patients with suspected pulmonary lesions on chest radiography. Eur Radiol. 2016; 26(8): 2837-2844. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-4104-6
Sabol JM. A Monte Carlo estimation of effective dose in chest tomosynthesis. Med Phys. 2009; 36(12): 5480-5487. doi: 10.1118/1.3250907
Molk N, Seeram E. Digital tomosynthesis of the chest: A lit-erature review. Radiography. 2015; 21(2): 197-202. doi: 10.1016/j. radi.2014.12.006
Yamada Y, Jinzaki M, Hashimoto M, et al. Tomosynthesis for the early detection of pulmonary emphysema: Diagnostic perfor-mance compared with chest radiography, using multidetector com-puted tomography as reference. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23(8): 2118-2126. doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2814-1
Meltzer C, Vikgren J, Bergman B, et al. Detection and charac-terization of solid pulmonary nodules at digital chest tomosyn-thesis: Data from a cohort of the pilot Swedish cardiopulmonary bioimage study. Radiol. 2018; 287(3): 1018-1027. doi: 10.1148/ra-diol.2018171481
Grosso M, Priotto R, Ghirardo D, et al. Comparison of digital tomosynthesis and computed tomography for lung nodule detec-tion in SOS screening program. La Radiologia Medica. 2017; 122(8): 568-574. doi: 10.1007/s11547-017-0765-3
Shim SS, Oh YW, Kong KA, Ryu YJ, Kim Y, Jang DH. Pul-monary nodule size evaluation with chest tomosynthesis and CT: A phantom study. Br J Radiol. 2015; 88(1047): 20140040. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20140040
Dobbins JT, McAdams HP, Sabol JM, et al. Multi-institutional evaluation of digital tomosynthesis, dual-energy radiography, and conventional chest radiography for the detection and manage-28 Yew S et al ment of pulmonary nodules. Radiology. 2017; 282(1): 236-250. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016150497
Söderman C, Johnsson ÅA, Vikgren J, et al. Detection of pul-monary nodule growth with chest tomosynthesis: A human ob-server study using simulated nodules. Acad Radiol. 2018; 26(4): 508- 518. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2018.05.004
Kim JH, Lee KH, Kim KT, et al. Comparison of digital tomo-synthesis and chest radiography for the detection of pulmonary nodules: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Radiol. 2016; 89(1068): 20160421. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20160421
Lee KS, Chung MJ. Limitations of detecting small solid lung nodules by using digital chest tomosynthesis. Radiol. 2018; 287(3): 1028-1029. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180144
Cabrera FJ, Kaplan AG, Youssef RF, et al. Digital tomosynthe-sis: A viable alternative to noncontrast computed tomography for the follow-up of nephrolithiasis? J Endourol. 2016; 30(4): 366-370. doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0271
Cabrera F, Preminger GM, Lipkin ME. As low as reasonably achievable: Methods for reducing radiation exposure during the management of renal and ureteral stones. Indian J Urol. 2014; 30(1): 55-59. doi: 10.4103/0970-1591.124208
Astroza GM, Neisius A, Wang AJ, et al. Radiation exposure in the follow-up of patients with urolithiasis comparing digital tomo-synthesis, non-contrast CT, standard KUB, and IVU. J Endourol. 2013; 27(10): 1187-1191. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0255
Liu S, Wang H, Feng W, et al. The value of X-ray digital tomo-synthesis in the diagnosis of urinary calculi. Exp Ther Med. 2018; 15(2): 1749-1753. doi: 10.3892/etm.2017.5531
Lacout A, Marcy P. Digital tomosynthesis: An innovative tool for challenging diagnoses in urology. Urol J. 2014; 11(2): 1511-1513.
Neisius A, Astroza GM, Wang C, et al. Digital tomosynthesis: a new technique for imaging nephrolithiasis. Specific organ doses and effective doses compared with renal stone protocol noncon-trast computed tomography. Urology. 2014; 83(2): 282-287. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.10.004
Machida H, Yuhara T, Tamura M, et al. Radiation dose of digital tomosynthesis for sinonasal examination: Comparison with multi-detector CT. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81(6): 1140-1145. doi: 10.1016/j. ejrad.2011.03.064
Yoo JY, Chung MJ, Choi B, et al. Digital tomosynthesis for PNS evaluation: Comparisons of patient exposure and image quality with plain radiography. Korean J Radiol. 2012; 13(2). 136-143. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2012.13.2.136
Machida H, Yuhara T, Ueno E, et al. Detection of parana-sal sinus opacification with digital tomosynthesis radiogra-phy. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2013; 37(2): 252-256. doi: 10.1097/ Systematic Review | Volume 4 | Issue 1| RCT.0b013e31827c0cb1
Blum A, Noel A, Regent D, Villani N, Gillet R, Gondim Teix-eira P. Tomosynthesis in musculoskeletal pathology. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2018; 99(7-8): 423-441. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2018.05.001
Quaia E, Grisi G, Baratella E, Cuttin R, Poillucci G, Kus S, Cova MA. Diagnostic imaging costs before and after digital tomo-synthesis implementation in patient management after detection of suspected thoracic lesions on chest radiography. Insights Imaging. 2014; 5(1): 147-155. doi: 10.1007/s13244-013-0305-1
Canella C, Philippe P, Pansini V, Salleron J, Flipo RM, Cotten A. Use of tomosynthesis for erosion evaluation in rheumatoid arthrit-Submit your article to this journal | https://openventio.org/submit-manuscript/ Systematic Review | Volume 4 | Issue 1| Yew S et al ic hands and wrists. Radiology. 2011; 258(1): 199-205. doi: 10.1148/ radiol.10100791
De Silvestro A, Martini K, Becker AS, et al. Postoperative im-aging of orthopaedic hardware in the hand and wrist: Is there an added value for tomosynthesis? Clin Radiol. 2018; 73(2): 214 e1- e9. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2017.08.001
Simoni P, Gérard L, Kaiser M-J, Ribbens C, Rinkin C, Malaise O, Malaise M. Use of tomosynthesis for detection of bone ero-sions of the foot in patients with established rheumatoid arthri-tis: Comparison with radiography and CT. Am J Roentgenol. 2015; 205(2): 364-370. doi: 10.2214/ajr.14.14120
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Radiology (ROJ) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.