Current challenges of full field digital mammography

Radiation Protection Dosimetry

Volumn 117, Issue 1-3, 2006, Pages 148-153

  Van Ongeval, Chantal ^a   Bosmans, H ^a   Van Steen, A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MODULATION TRANSFER FUNCTION; RADIATION DETECTOR; RADIATION FIELD; SCORING SYSTEM;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; X-RAY INTENSIFYING SCREENS;

EID: 33645210415     PISSN: 01448420     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/rpd/nci729     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Heywang-Köbrunner, S. H., Dershaw, D. D. and Schreer, I. Diagnostic Breast Imaging, second edn. Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany (2001), ISBN 3-13-102892-0.
2. European Commission. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Mammography Screening, third edn. (Luxembourg: EC) (2001), ISBN 92-894-1145-7.
3. Houn, F., Elliott, M. L. and McCrohan, J. L. The Mammography Quality Standards Act of 1992. History and philosophy. Radiol. Clin. North Am. 33(6), 1059-1065 (1995).
4. Beutel, J., Kundel, H. and Van Metter, R. L. Handbook of medical imaging, vol. 1. Physics and psychophysics. SPIE PRESS, Bellingham, WA (2000), ISBN: 0819436216.
5. Bosmans, H., Carton, A-K., Van Ongeval, C., Nijs, K., Rogge, F., Marchal, G., Torbica, P., Bernatova, M. and Peer, S. Image quality measurements in digital mammography. In: Proceedings of International Workshop DIMOND III EC Funded Research Project 'Optimisation of Dose and Performance in Interventional and Digital Imaging', Leuven, 25-27 March (submitted for publication).
6. Baker, J. A., Rosen, E. L., Lo, J. Y., Gimenez, E. I., Walsh, R. and Soo, M. S. Computer-aided detection (CAD) in screening mammography: sensitivity of commercial CAD systems for detecting architectural distortion. Am. J. Roentgenol. 181(4), 1083-1088 (2003).
7. Zheng, B., Hardesty, L. A., Poller, W. R., Sumkin, J. H. and Golla, S. Mammography with computer-aided detection: Reproducibility assessment-initial experience. Radiology 228(1), 58-62 (2003).
8. Moberg, K., Bjurstam, N., Wilczek, B., Rostgard, L., Egge, E. and Muren, C. Computed assisted detection of interval breast cancers. Eur. J. Radiol. 39, 104-110 (2001).
9. van Engen, R., Young, K., Bosmans, H. and Thijssen, M. Addendum on digital mammography to the European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography (2003) Available at www.euref.org.
10. Carton, A.-K. Development and application of methods for the assessment of image quality and detector performance in digital mammography. PhD Thesis, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium (2004).
11. Fracheboud, J., Otto, S. J., van Dijck, J. A., Broeders, M. J., Verbeek, A. L., de Koning, H. J. and National Evaluation Team for Breast cancer screening (NETB). Decreased rates of advanced breast cancer due to mammography screening in The Netherlands. Br. J. Cancer 91(5), 861-867 (2004).
12. Skaane, P., Young, K. and Skjennald, A. Population-based mammography screening: Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading - The Oslo I study. Radiology 229, 877-884 (2003).
13. Lewin, J. M., Hendrick, R. E., D'Orsi, C. J., Isaacs, P. K., Moss, L. J., Karellas, A., Sisney, G. A., Kuni, C. C. and Cutter, G. R. Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: Results of 4945 paired examinations. Radiology 218, 873-880 (2001).
14. Birdwell, R. L., Ikeda, D. M., O'Shauhhnessy, K. F. and Sickles, E. A. Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology 219, 192-202 (2001).
15. Pisano, E. D. et al. Interpretation of digital mammograms: Comparison of speed and accuracy of soft-copy versus printed film display. Radiology 223, 483-488 (2002).
16. Skaane, P. and Skjennald, A. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: Randomized trial in a population-based screening programme - The Oslo 77 Study. Radiology 232, 197-204 (2004).