Literature DB >> 12920561

Patient dose in full-field digital mammography: an Italian survey.

Gisella Gennaro1, Paola Baldelli, Angelo Taibi, Cosimo Di Maggio, Mauro Gambaccini.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare performance and patient dose of full-field digital mammography units for clinical use. Measurements of linearity and automatic exposure control stability were performed on four units installed in as many Italian sites. The tube output was also obtained by the same ionization chamber, permitting to evaluate ratios mGy/mAs for each available spectrum. The entrance air-kerma was calculated over a sample of 800 cranio-caudal mammograms and the average glandular dose obtained, assuming two mean glandular compositions of 50 and 30%, respectively. Digital systems showed very good linearity and comparable responses. The stability of the automatic exposure control was better than 5% for all systems. Regarding doses, the two mammography units that work mainly in contrast mode deliver, respectively, 17 and 28% more dose compared with those working in standard mode. For the latter mode, the mean average glandular dose was in the range 1.25-1.37 mGy and 1.37-1.49 mGy for the 50 and 30% glandular composition, respectively. Results of this study were compared with those of other surveys, showing that full-field digital mammography allows a significant clinical dose reduction compared with screen/film mammography.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12920561     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-003-2010-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  24 in total

1.  Influence of anode/filter material and tube potential on contrast, signal-to-noise ratio and average absorbed dose in mammography: a Monte Carlo study.

Authors:  D R Dance; A K Thilander; M Sandborg; C L Skinner; I A Castellano; G A Carlsson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Full-field digital mammography designed as a complete system.

Authors:  S Muller
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.528

3.  New digital mammography systems may require different X-ray spectra and, therefore, more general normalized glandular dose values.

Authors:  C Kimme-Smith
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Performance comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography in clinical practice.

Authors:  Eric A Berns; R Edward Hendrick; Gary R Cutter
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Computer-aided detection in direct digital full-field mammography: initial results.

Authors:  F Baum; U Fischer; S Obenauer; E Grabbe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-06-12       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol.

Authors:  D R Dance; C L Skinner; K C Young; J R Beckett; C J Kotre
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  [Image quality and optical density in mammography: study on phantoms].

Authors:  J Stinés; A Noël; S Estivalet; P Troufléau; E Netter; J Quinquis
Journal:  J Radiol       Date:  1998-04

8.  Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations.

Authors:  J M Lewin; R E Hendrick; C J D'Orsi; P K Isaacs; L J Moss; A Karellas; G A Sisney; C C Kuni; G R Cutter
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  A model for optimization of spectral shape in digital mammography.

Authors:  R Fahrig; M J Yaffe
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  A pilot survey of radiation doses received in the United Kingdom Breast Screening Programme.

Authors:  A Burch; D A Goodman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 3.039

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Digital mammography: current state and future aspects.

Authors:  U Fischer; K P Hermann; F Baum
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-08-20       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  [Workflow in digital screening mammography].

Authors:  U Bick; F Diekmann; E M Fallenberg
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Dose reduction and its influence on diagnostic accuracy and radiation risk in digital mammography: an observer performance study using an anthropomorphic breast phantom.

Authors:  T Svahn; B Hemdal; M Ruschin; D P Chakraborty; I Andersson; A Tingberg; S Mattsson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Clinical dose performance of full field digital mammography in a breast screening programme.

Authors:  J B McCullagh; P Baldelli; N Phelan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-05-17       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Effect of soft-copy display supported by CAD on mammography screening performance.

Authors:  Antonius A J Roelofs; Sander van Woudenberg; Johannes D M Otten; Jan H C L Hendriks; Anke Bödicker; Carl J G Evertsz; Nico Karssemeijer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-08-25       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  State of the art of current modalities for the diagnosis of breast lesions.

Authors:  Cosimo Di Maggio
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 7.  Reconstruction of absorbed doses to fibroglandular tissue of the breast of women undergoing mammography (1960 to the present).

Authors:  Isabelle Thierry-Chef; Steven L Simon; Robert M Weinstock; Deukwoo Kwon; Martha S Linet
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 2.841

8.  Dose comparison between screen/film and full-field digital mammography.

Authors:  Gisella Gennaro; Cosimo di Maggio
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-05-30       Impact factor: 7.034

9.  Large field of view, fast and low dose multimodal phase-contrast imaging at high x-ray energy.

Authors:  Alberto Astolfo; Marco Endrizzi; Fabio A Vittoria; Paul C Diemoz; Benjamin Price; Ian Haig; Alessandro Olivo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Matteo Basilio Suter; Filippo Pesapane; Giorgio Maria Agazzi; Tania Gagliardi; Olga Nigro; Anna Bozzini; Francesca Priolo; Silvia Penco; Enrico Cassano; Claudio Chini; Alessandro Squizzato
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 4.380

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.