PURPOSE: To evaluate the visualization of microcalcifications on mammographies obtained by full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in comparison to conventional film-screen mammography (FSM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-seven digital and film-screen mammographies depicting histologically proven lesions (27 benign, 20 malignant) were assessed by 4 readers. The images obtained with the different systems were comparable in terms of positioning. Maximum time interval between film-screen mammography and digital mammography was three months. Using a questionnaire, the readers evaluated the number of microcalcifications and their subjective conspicuity for FFDM (Senographe 2000D, GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, USA) and FSM. A 7-point scale based on the BIRADS classification was used to characterize the calcifications by means of ROC analysis. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were seen between the two types of mammography among the readers in assessing the number of microcalcifications. The subjective conspicuity of microcalcifications was found to be significantly better for digital mammographies. The diagnosis assigned by the readers did not show significant differences between the two systems. CONCLUSION: Although the subjective conspicuity of microcalcifications was found to be significantly better on digital mammography compared to film-screen mammography, there was no significant advantage of digital mammography resulting from the higher contrast resolution nor a disadvantage in terms of characterization of microcalcifications resulting from the lower spacial resolution. The advantages of digital mammography (e. g. CAD-systems, archiving, dose reduction) can be used without a loss of diagnostic quality.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the visualization of microcalcifications on mammographies obtained by full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in comparison to conventional film-screen mammography (FSM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-seven digital and film-screen mammographies depicting histologically proven lesions (27 benign, 20 malignant) were assessed by 4 readers. The images obtained with the different systems were comparable in terms of positioning. Maximum time interval between film-screen mammography and digital mammography was three months. Using a questionnaire, the readers evaluated the number of microcalcifications and their subjective conspicuity for FFDM (Senographe 2000D, GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, USA) and FSM. A 7-point scale based on the BIRADS classification was used to characterize the calcifications by means of ROC analysis. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were seen between the two types of mammography among the readers in assessing the number of microcalcifications. The subjective conspicuity of microcalcifications was found to be significantly better for digital mammographies. The diagnosis assigned by the readers did not show significant differences between the two systems. CONCLUSION: Although the subjective conspicuity of microcalcifications was found to be significantly better on digital mammography compared to film-screen mammography, there was no significant advantage of digital mammography resulting from the higher contrast resolution nor a disadvantage in terms of characterization of microcalcifications resulting from the lower spacial resolution. The advantages of digital mammography (e. g. CAD-systems, archiving, dose reduction) can be used without a loss of diagnostic quality.
Authors: Kathrin Barbara Krug; Hartmut Stützer; Peter Frommolt; Julia Boecker; Henning Bovenschulte; Volker Sendler; Klaus Lackner Journal: Int J Breast Cancer Date: 2010-10-17