Digital mammography: Experiences in clinical application;Digitale mammographie: Erfahrungen bei klinischer anwendung

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Neuen Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 169, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 45-52

  Schonhofen H ^a,d   Arnold, W ^b   Hess, Th ^c   Allgayer, B ^a  

^a LUZERNER KANTONSSPITAL   (Switzerland)

^b Pathologisches Institut

^c Gynäkologie ^*

^d Radiologie   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Clinical experiences; Digital radiography; Mammography

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST FIBROADENOMA; BREAST TUMOR; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; GYNECOMASTIA; HUMAN; LIPOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

BIOPSY; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EVALUATION STUDIES; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; GALACTORRHEA; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; NEOPLASM STAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0031856532     PISSN: 09366652     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. American College of Radiology: Mammography quality control manuals for radiologists, radiographic technologists and medical physicists. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 1990
2. Brettle DS, Ward SC, Parkin GJS, Cowen AR, Sumsion HJ. A clinical comparison between conventional and digital mammography utilizing computed radiography. Brit Radiol 1994; 67: 464-468
3. Coveney EC, Geraghty JG, O'Laoide R, Hourihane JB, O'Higgins NJ. Reasons underlying negative mammography in patients with palpable breast cancer. Clin Radiol 1994; 49: 123-125
4. Eklund GW, Cardenosa G, Parsons W. Assessing adequacy of mammographic image quality. Radiology 1994; 190: 297-307
5. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DDH, Feinstein AR. Variability in radiologists interpretation of mammograms. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 1493-1499
6. Freedman MT, Steller TE, Jafroudi H. Digital mammography: Tradeoffs between 50 and 100 microns pixel size. Proc SPIE 1995; 2432: 114
7. Feig SA, Yaffe MJ. Digital mammography, computer-aided diagnosis, and telemammography. Rad Clin North Amer 1995; 33: 1205-1230
8. Frischbier HJ, Hoeffken W, Robra BP. Mammographie in der Krebsfrüherkennung. Stuttgart: EnkeVerlag, 1994
9. Galkin BM, Feig SA, Muir HD. The technical quality ot mammography in centers participating in a regional breast cancer awareness program. RadioGraphics 1988; 8: 133-145
10. Hall FM, Storella JM, Silverstone DZ, Wishak G. Nonpalpable breast lesions: recommendations for biopsy based on suspicion of carcinoma at mammography. Radiology 1988; 167: 353-358
11. Hendrick RE. Standardization of image quality and radiation dose in mammography. Radiology 1990; 174: 648-654
12. Hildell J, Hofer B, Zynamon A. Storage phosphor digital mammography vs. screen-film mammography. Preliminary results of comparison in a phantom model and initial clinical experience. Radiologica diagnostica 1992; 33: 312-319
13. Jarlman O, Samuelson L, Braw M. Digital luminescence mammography. Acta radiologica 1991; 32: 110-113
14. Karssemeijer N, Frieling JTM, Hendriks JHCL. Spatial resolution in digital mammography. Invest Radiol 1993; 28: 413-419
15. Kitahama H. Efficacy of storage phosphor-based digital mammography in diagnosis of breast cancer - comparison with film-screen mammography. Nippon Igaku Hshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1991; 51: 547-560
16. Kopans DB. The accuracy of mammographic interpretation. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 1521-1522
17. Lambruschi G, Tagliagambe A, Palla L, Torri T, D'Allesandro F, Pastori R, Barbieri L. Confronto Tra mammografia tradizionale e digitale con fosfori a memoria. Radiologica Med 1993; 85: 59-64
18. Miller AB, Baines CJ, To T, Wall C. Canada National Breast Screening Study. 1.Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40 to 49 years. Can Med Assoc J 1992; 147: 1459-1476
19. Miller AB, Baines JC, To T, Wall C. Canada National Breast Screening Study. 2. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 50 to 59 years. Can Med Assoc J 1992; 147: 1477-1488
20. Nishikawa RM, Mawdsley GE, Fenster A, Yaffe MJ. Scanned projection digital mammography. Med Phys 1987; 14: 717
21. Oestmann WJ, Kopans D. Hall DA, McCarthy KA, Rubens JA, Green R. A comparison of digitized storage and conventional mammography in the detection of malignant microcalcification. Invest Radiol 1988; 23: 725-728
22. Parkin GJS. Digital mammography: clinical aspects. Proc. Symposium Mammographicum 94, University of York, 1994
23. Robens MM, Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Chetty U, Donnan PT, Forrest P, Hepburn W, Huggins A, Kirkpatrick AE, Lamb J. Edinburgh trial of screening for breast cancer: mortality at seven years. Lancet 1990; 335: 241-246
24. Robertson CL. A private breast imaging practice: medical audit of 25788 screening and 1077 diagnostic examinations. Radiology 1993; 187: 75-79
25. Sickles EA. Mammographic detecrability of breast microcalcifications. Amer J Radiol 1932; 139: 913-918
26. Smathers RL, Bush E, Drace JD, Stevens M, Sommer FG, Brown BW, Karras B. Screen-film and digitized film-display. Radiology 1986; 159: 673-677
27. Spiessl B, Bears OH, Hermanek P, Hutter RVP, Scheibe O, Sobin LH, Wagner G. TNM-Atlas (2. Aufl.). Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1990
28. Tabàr L Fagerberg G, Dutty SW, Day NE, Gad A, Groöntoft O. Update of the Swedish two county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Rad Clin North Amer 1992; 30: 187-210
29. Thelen M. Screening des Mammakarzinoms. Fortschr Röntgenstr 1993; 159: 409-411
30. Van Dam PA, Van Goethem ML Kerschot E, Vervliet J, Van den Veyver IB, de Scepper A, Buytaert P. Palpable solid breast masses: retrospective single- and multimodality evaluation of 201 lesions. Radiology 1988; 166: 435-439
31. Van Oord JC, Van der Vliet AM, Thyn CJ, Mak B, Hoogeboom BJ. The value of ultrasound mammography in palpable breast masses. Fortschr Röntgenstr 1991; 155: 63-66
32. Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R, Mravunac M, Sturman F, Day NE. Reduction of breast cancer mortality through mass screening with modern mammography: first results of the Nijmegen project. Lancet 1984: 1222-1224
33. Warren DL Stelling CB. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive value and accuracy of filmscreen mammography. J Ky Med Assoc 1989; 87: 169-173