Literature DB >> 8700025

Mammography fixed grid versus reciprocating grid: evaluation using cadaveric breasts as test objects.

C Kimme-Smith1, J Sayre, M McCombs, R H Gold, L W Bassett.   

Abstract

In this study we use unfixed cadaveric breasts to obtain mammography images with fixed and reciprocating grids. Sheets of acrylic, containing one or more clusters of simulated calcifications and masses, were superimposed on two fresh cadaveric breasts (3.4 and 6.5 cm thick), and were imaged with a fixed grid and a reciprocating grid. Six radiologists, working independently, attempted to identify the number of clusters and/or masses in 114 images containing 139 clusters of simulated calcifications and 42 simulated masses. Thirty-four of these images were normal, containing no lesions. For the thinner breast, no statistically significant difference was found in the detection of clusters of calcifications in the images produced with the fixed grid compared to those produced with the reciprocating grid. However, for the detection of calcifications in images of the thicker breast, sensitivity of 74% for detection of calcifications when a fixed grid was used was significantly less than sensitivity of 86% when a reciprocating grid was used (P = 0.006). The mass detection sensitivity was 91% for images made with a fixed grid compared to 96% for images made with a reciprocating grid, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.346). The use of cadaveric breasts as test objects was well accepted by radiologists. Only for the thick cadaveric breast were differences between the two grids significant, and these differences were restricted to the task of finding calcifications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8700025     DOI: 10.1118/1.597695

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  2 in total

1.  An automatic correction method for the heel effect in digitized mammography images.

Authors:  Marcelo Zanchetta do Nascimento; Annie France Frère; Fernao Germano
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2007-09-11       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  A comparison study of image features between FFDM and film mammogram images.

Authors:  Hao Jing; Yongyi Yang; Miles N Wernick; Laura M Yarusso; Robert M Nishikawa
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.071

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.