Literature DB >> 2738948

Film-screen mammography: comparison of views.

L W Bassett, D H Bunnell, R H Gold, R Jahanshahi.   

Abstract

The authors performed oblique, mediolateral, and cephalocaudal film-screen mammographic views for all 9,662 patients examined at the UCLA Medical Center from January 1, 1980 to December 31, 1985. In these patients, biopsies yielded 172 cancers; 87 were nonpalpable. There was a mammographic mass in 113, only calcifications in 38, and distortion or asymmetry of breast parenchyma in 12. We retrospectively determined how each view contributed to depiction of tumors: 125 cancers were seen on all views, 10 on none, 11 on the oblique only, 4 on the mediolateral only, and 3 on the cephalocaudal only. The remaining cancers were detected on various combinations of views. Cancers were missed in individual views because of overlying dense tissue or because the tumor was outside the area depicted in the film. Breast cancer screening is performed with two views of each breast. Oblique-cephalocaudal two-view mammograms showed 158 cancers; mediolateral-cephalocaudal two-view mammograms showed 151 cancers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2738948      PMCID: PMC2625984     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc        ISSN: 0027-9684            Impact factor:   1.798


  13 in total

1.  The oblique view of mammography.

Authors:  B Lundgren
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1977-09       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Evidence on screening for breast cancer from a randomized trial.

Authors:  S Shapiro
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Survey of mammography practices.

Authors:  L W Bassett; J J Diamond; R H Gold; R McLelland
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1987-12       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Radiation risk from mammography: is it clinically significant?

Authors:  S A Feig
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Selective use of the oblique projection in mammography.

Authors:  F M Hall; A L Berenberg
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1978-09       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Single view mammography: a simple and efficent approach to breast cancer screening.

Authors:  B Lundgren; S Jakobsson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1976-09       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Baseline screening mammography: one vs two views per breast.

Authors:  E A Sickles; W N Weber; H B Galvin; S H Ominsky; R A Sollitto
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Number of projections in mammography: influence on detection of breast disease.

Authors:  I Andersson; J Hildell; A Mühlow; H Pettersson
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1978-02       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.

Authors:  L Tabár; C J Fagerberg; A Gad; L Baldetorp; L H Holmberg; O Gröntoft; U Ljungquist; B Lundström; J C Månson; G Eklund
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-04-13       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Single view negative mode xeromammography: an approach to reduce radiation exposure in breast cancer screening.

Authors:  J B Buchanan; R M Jager
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1977-04       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.