Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T10:37:38.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Breast tumors detection using multistatic microwave imaging with antipodal Vivaldi antennas utilizing DMAS and it-DMAS techniques

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2024

Athul O. Asok
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Palakkad, Kerala, India
Ayush Tripathi
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Palakkad, Kerala, India
Sukomal Dey*
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Palakkad, Kerala, India
*
Corresponding author: Sukomal Dey; Email: sukomal.iitpkd@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This work presents a study where a sinusoidal corrugated antipodal Vivaldi antenna (SC-AVA) operating in the ultra-wideband (UWB) region is employed as a transducer for microwave imaging (MWI) of a cancerous breast. The functionality of the antenna within the UWB range is confirmed based on performance parameters like return loss, gain, radiation pattern, fidelity factor, and group delay. E-field distribution, H-field distribution, and near field directivity simulations in the presence of the breast phantom have also been carried out and reported. The practical application of the developed antenna for biomedical imaging is evaluated by measuring the specific absorption rate (SAR) readings at multiple frequencies within its operating range. The SAR readings are obtained from an electromagnetic simulator by modelling a realistic heterogeneous breast phantom with multiple embedded tumors, and placing them in close proximity to the transducer. The modelled SC-AVA is further utilized for imaging multiple tumors hidden inside the gland layer of the heterogeneous breast phantom developed in-house. The fabricated breast phantom is scanned using the in-house developed multistatic MWI setup. Based on the data obtained from the scanning setup the images are reconstructed using both the delay multiply and sum (DMAS) and iterative DMAS imaging algorithms. Furthermore, a comparison of the reconstructed images is done to check in which case the obtained images are closer to the fabricated breast phantom.

Information

Type
Biomedical Applications
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with The European Microwave Association.
Figure 0

Figure 1. The modelled AVA in the simulator. (a) CAVA and (b) SC-AVA.

Figure 1

Figure 2. The fabricated SC-AVA. (a) Front side and (b) back side.

Figure 2

Figure 3. The equivalent circuit model of the SC-AVA.

Figure 3

Table 1. R, L, and C values of SC-AVA circuit model

Figure 4

Figure 4. The simulated responses of the antenna. (a) Return loss and (b) gain response.

Figure 5

Figure 5. The antenna measurement setup. (a) Complete setup and (b) antenna mounting stand.

Figure 6

Figure 6. The comparison of the simulated antenna response with its measured counterpart. (a) Return loss and (b) gain response.

Figure 7

Figure 7. The simulated near field distribution of the antenna at (a) 3.5 GHz and (b) 4.5 GHz. The plane with respect to the antenna in which the field distribution is observed is depicted in (c).

Figure 8

Figure 8. Normalized magnitude of transmitted signal and received signal for (a) front to front with antipodal sections opposite to each other, (b) front to front with antipodal sections on the same side, and (c) side-by-side configuration.

Figure 9

Figure 9. The simulated group delay for (a) front to front with antipodal sections opposite to each other, (b) front to front with antipodal sections on the same side, and (c) side-by-side configuration.

Figure 10

Figure 10. The modelled heterogeneous breast phantom in the simulator with four embedded tumors. (a) Top view, (b) front view, and (c) perspective view.

Figure 11

Figure 11. The SAR analysis setup in the simulator. (a) Top view and (b) perspective view.

Figure 12

Table 2. Multistatic heterogeneous breast phantom SAR values

Figure 13

Figure 12. The simulated E-field distribution of the antenna with heterogeneous breast phantom at (a) 4 GHz, (b) 6 GHz, (c) 8 GHz, and (d) 10 GHz. The scaling is displayed in inset.

Figure 14

Figure 13. The simulated H-field distribution of the antenna with heterogeneous breast phantom at (a) 4 GHz, (b) 6 GHz, (c) 8 GHz, and (d) 10 GHz. The scaling is displayed in inset.

Figure 15

Figure 14. The NFD plot in the proposed work.

Figure 16

Figure 15. (a) The fabricated heterogeneous breast phantoms with four tumors and (b) the heterogeneous breast phantom with concealed tumors.

Figure 17

Table 3. Composition of different materials for breast phantom fabrication

Figure 18

Figure 16. The (a) measurement setup and (b) measured relative permittivity values of the modelled breast phantom.

Figure 19

Figure 17. The multistatic imaging setup used in the proposed work.

Figure 20

Figure 18. The imaging process flow chart.

Figure 21

Figure 19. The reconstructed images of the breast phantom with four tumors using (a) DMAS and (b) it-DMAS image reconstruction methods.

Figure 22

Table 4. Comparison the imaging results with similar breast imaging works