Literature DB >> 22977375

Comparison of Image Quality Criteria between Digital Storage Phosphor Plate in Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography in the Detection of Breast Cancer.

Pushpa Thevi Rajendran1, Vijayalakshmi Krishnapillai, Sulaiman Tamanang, Kanaga Kumari Chelliah.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Digital mammography is slowly replacing screen film mammography. In digital mammography, 2 methods are available in acquiring images: digital storage phosphor plate and full-field digital mammography. The aim of this study was to compare the image quality acquired from the 2 methods of digital mammography in the detection of breast cancer.
METHODS: The study took place at the National Cancer Society, Kuala Lumpur, and followed 150 asymptomatic women for the duration of 1 year. Participating women gave informed consent and were exposed to 4 views from each system. Two radiologists independently evaluated the printed images based on the image quality criteria in mammography. McNemar's test was used to compare the image quality criteria between the systems.
RESULTS: The agreement between the radiologists for the digital storage phosphor plate was к = 0.551 and for full-field digital mammography was к = 0.523. Full-field digital mammography was significantly better compared with the digital storage phosphor plate in right and left mediolateral oblique views (P < 0.05) in the detection of microcalcifications, which are early signs of breast cancer. However, both systems were comparable in all other aspects of image quality.
CONCLUSION: Digital mammography is a useful screening tool for the detection of early breast cancer and ensures better prognosis and quality of life.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast cancer; comparative studies; early detection of cancer; mammography; radiology

Year:  2012        PMID: 22977375      PMCID: PMC3436497     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Malays J Med Sci        ISSN: 1394-195X


  15 in total

1.  Reasons for failure of a mammography unit at clinical image review in the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program.

Authors:  L W Bassett; D M Farria; S Bansal; M A Farquhar; P A Wilcox; S A Feig
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  New CR system with pixel size of 50 microm for digital mammography: physical imaging properties and detection of subtle microcalcifications.

Authors:  Tadamitsu Ideguchi; Yoshiharu Higashida; Yasuyuki Kawaji; Mitsuo Sasaki; Makoto Zaizen; Rei Shibayama; Yumiko Nakamura; Kimihiko Koyanagi; Hirotaka Ikeda; Masafumi Ohki; Fukai Toyofuku; Toru Muranaka
Journal:  Radiat Med       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug

3.  Digital mammography: opportunities and limitations.

Authors:  M Muttarak
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 1.858

4.  Image quality and the clinical radiographic examination.

Authors:  C J Vyborny
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1997 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.333

5.  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

6.  Clinical image evaluation.

Authors:  L W Bassett
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.303

7.  Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--observer performance study.

Authors:  Per Skaane; Corinne Balleyguier; Felix Diekmann; Susanne Diekmann; Jean-Charles Piguet; Kari Young; Loren T Niklason
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-08-11       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--Oslo I study.

Authors:  Per Skaane; Kari Young; Arnulf Skjennald
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-10-23       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program--the Oslo II Study.

Authors:  Per Skaane; Arnulf Skjennald
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-05-20       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  John M Lewin; Carl J D'Orsi; R Edward Hendrick; Lawrence J Moss; Pamela K Isaacs; Andrew Karellas; Gary R Cutter
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  1 in total

1.  Impact of full field digital mammography diagnosis for female patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  Tuan Wang; Jian-Jun Shuai; Xing Li; Zhi Wen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.817

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.