Literature DB >> 25571915

The potential use of ultra-low radiation dose images in digital mammography--a clinical proof-of-concept study in craniocaudal views.

A M J Bluekens1, W J H Veldkamp, K H Schuur, N Karssemeijer, M J M Broeders, G J den Heeten.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the potential of low-dose images in digital mammography by analysing the effect of substantial dose reduction in craniocaudal (CC) views on clinical performance.
METHODS: At routine mammography, additional CC views were obtained with about 10% of the standard dose. Five radiologists retrospectively read the standard [mediolateral oblique (MLO) + CC] and combination low-dose mammograms (standard MLO + low-dose CC). If present, lesion type, conspicuity and suggested work-up were recorded. Final diagnoses were made by histology or follow up. A t-test or χ(2) test was used to compare results.
RESULTS: 421 cases were included, presenting 5 malignancies, 66 benign lesions and multiple non-specific radiologic features. Using MLO with low-dose CC, all lesions were detected by at least one reader, but altogether less often than with standard mammography (sensitivity, 73.9% vs 81.5%). Missed lesions concerned all types. Lesions detected with both protocols were described similarly (p = 0.084) with comparable work-up recommendations (p = 0.658).
CONCLUSION: Mammography with ultra-low-dose CC images particularly influences detection. While sensitivity decreased, specificity was unaffected. In this proof-of-concept study a lower limit was to be determined that is not intended nor applicable for clinical practice. This should facilitate further research in optimization of a low-dose approach, which has potential in a relatively young and largely asymptomatic population. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Tungsten/silver-acquired mammography images might facilitate substantial dose reduction. Ultra-low-dose CC images reduce sensitivity, but not specificity. Low-dose images have potential in a largely young and asymptomatic population; a baseline is set for further research in optimization of a low-dose approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25571915      PMCID: PMC4651203          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20140626

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  14 in total

1.  Dose dependence of mass and microcalcification detection in digital mammography: free response human observer studies.

Authors:  Mark Ruschin; Pontus Timberg; Magnus Båth; Bengt Hemdal; Tony Svahn; Rob S Saunders; Ehsan Samei; Ingvar Andersson; Soren Mattsson; Dev P Chakrabort; Anders Tingber
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Digital mammography: effects of reduced radiation dose on diagnostic performance.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; Robert S Saunders; Jay A Baker; David M Delong
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Effect of dose reduction on the detection of mammographic lesions: a mathematical observer model analysis.

Authors:  Amarpreet S Chawla; Ehsan Samei; Robert Saunders; Craig Abbey; David Delong
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  An investigation into why two-view mammography is better than one-view in breast cancer screening.

Authors:  A K Hackshaw; N J Wald; M J Michell; S Field; A R Wilson
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.350

5.  Incident screening cancers detected with a second mammographic view: pathological and radiological features.

Authors:  R M Given-Wilson; R G Blanks
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.350

6.  Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images.

Authors:  Per Skaane; Andriy I Bandos; Ellen B Eben; Ingvild N Jebsen; Mona Krager; Unni Haakenaasen; Ulrika Ekseth; Mina Izadi; Solveig Hofvind; Randi Gullien
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Performance of clinical mammography: a nationwide study from Denmark.

Authors:  Allan Jensen; Ilse Vejborg; Niels Severinsen; Susanne Nielsen; Fritz Rank; Gerd Just Mikkelsen; Jørgen Hilden; Dorte Vistisen; Uffe Dyreborg; Elsebeth Lynge
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2006-07-01       Impact factor: 7.396

8.  Findings at mammographic screening on only one standard projection: outcomes analysis.

Authors:  E A Sickles
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities.

Authors:  Sara L Jackson; Stephen H Taplin; Edward A Sickles; Linn Abraham; William E Barlow; Patricia A Carney; Berta Geller; Eric A Berns; Gary R Cutter; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-05-26       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Further factors for the estimation of mean glandular dose using the United Kingdom, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols.

Authors:  D R Dance; K C Young; R E van Engen
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.