Literature DB >> 11199434

[Full-field digital mammography: dose-dependent detectability of breast lesions and microcalcinosis].

S Obenauer1, K P Hermann, C Schorn, U Fischer, E Grabbe.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The study compares contrast-detail and microcalcification detectability of a full-field digital mammography (FFDM) to a state-of-the-art conventional screen-film mammography (SFM) by using different doses in the digital system.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The investigations were performed with an FFDM (Senographe 2000 D, GEMS) and an SFM system (Senographe DMR, GEMS) using a contrast-detail mammography phantom (CDMAM) and an anthropomorphic breast phantom with superimposed microcalcifications. The digital detector was exposed with standard dose of SFM and with a dose reduction of up to 75%. Contrast-detail curves and correct observation ratio (COR) were performed for the CDMAM phantom. ROC analysis with a confidence level ranging from 1 to 5 was done with the results of the anthropomorphic phantom.
RESULTS: Digital mammography with the same dose revealed at least an equivalent or even higher detectability rate than conventional mammography, COR could be increased at about 10-25%. The ROC analysis yielded better results for the FFDM system. The same lesion detectability in digital mammography as in the conventional method was reached at a dose reduction of about 25%, concerning spot views even at higher reduction. Dose reduction in the anthropomorphic phantom resulted in a linear loss of detectability. The same detectability as in conventional mammography was reached, however, by a dose reduction of about 50%.
CONCLUSION: The results suggest that FFDM is at least equivalent to or--as far as spot views are concerned--superior to conventional SFM concerning the detectability of simulated lesions. Thus, a potential of dose reduction is suggested.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11199434     DOI: 10.1055/s-2000-9222

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rofo        ISSN: 1438-9010


  3 in total

1.  Soft copy versus hard copy reading in digital mammography.

Authors:  Silvia Obenauer; Klaus-Peter Hermann; Katharina Marten; Susanne Luftner-Nagel; Dorit von Heyden; Per Skaane; Eckhardt Grabbe
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2004-01-30       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  A technique optimization protocol and the potential for dose reduction in digital mammography.

Authors:  Nicole T Ranger; Joseph Y Lo; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  [Clinical results of digital mammography].

Authors:  R Schulz-Wendtland; K-P Hermann; W Bautz
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 0.635

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.