Current Status of Digital Mammography

Seminars in Breast Disease

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 42-48

  Hendrick, R Edward ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SYSTEM; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIODIAGNOSIS; REVIEW; X RAY FILM;

EID: 0842344438     PISSN: 10924450     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Nass SJ, Henderson IC, Lashof LJ (eds): Mammography and Beyond: Developing Technologies for the Early Detection of Breast Cancer. Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 2001
2. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, et al: American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: Update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. 53:141-169, 2003
3. Yaffe MJ, Rowlands JA: X-ray detectors for digital radiography. Phys Med Biol 42:1-39, 1997
4. Cowan AR, Parkin GJ, Hawkridge P: Direct digital mammography image acquisition. Eur Radiol 7:918-930, 1997; see also Sectra AB Web site: http://www.sectra.se, 2003
5. Chakraborty DP: The effect of the antiscatter grid on full-field digital mammography phantom images. J Digital Imaging 12:12-22, 1999
6. th International Workshop on Digital Mammography. Yaffe MJ (ed), Madison, WI, Medical Physics Publishing Co., 2001
7. Suryanarayanan MS, Karellas A, Vedantham S, et al: Flat-panel digital mammography system: comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images. Radiology 225:801-807, 2002
8. Berns EA, Hendrick RE, Cutter GA: Performance comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography in clinical practice. Med Phys 29:830-834, 2002
9. Premarket applications for digital mammography systems; final guidance for industry and FDAT. U. S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiologic Health, Radiology Devices Branch, February 16, 2001; full text available at: http://www.fda.gov/edrh/ode/guidance/983.pdf
10. th International Workshop on Digital Mammography. Yaffe MJ (ed), Madison, WI, Medical Physics Publishing Co., pp. 475-481, 2001
11. Venta LA, Hendrick RE, Adler YT, et al: Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:1241-1248, 2001
12. Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, et al: Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: Full-field digital mammography vs. screen-film mammography. Eur Radiol 12:2679-2683, 2002
13. Lewin JM: Full-field digital mammography. A candid assessment. Diagnostic Imaging 21:40-45, 1999
14. Lewin JM, Hendriek RE, D'Orsi CJ, et al: Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography for cancer detection: Results of 4945 paired examinations. Radiology 218:873-880, 2001
15. Lewin JM, D'Orsi CA, Hendrick RE, et al: Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:671-677, 2002
16. Hanley JA, McNeil, BJ: The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29-36, 1982
17. Dr. Per Skaane, private communication.
18. Hillman BJ: Current clinical trials of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network. Radiology 224:636-638, 2002