Digital versus screen-film mammography: A retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 64, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 419-425

  Heddson, Boel ^a   Rönnow, Katarina ^a   Olsson, Magnus ^a   Miller, David ^b  

^a HELSINGBORG HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b Statistical Analysis   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer screening; Diagnostic testing; Digital mammography; Mammography

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; DATA STORAGE EQUIPMENT; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; ONCOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; TUMORS;

BREAST CANCER SCREENING; DIAGNOSTIC TESTING; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY;

MAMMOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PHOTON COUNTING DIRECT RADIOGRAPHY; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCREEN FILM MAMMOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SWEDEN; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; X-RAY INTENSIFYING SCREENS;

EID: 36148967672     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.02.030     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Nystrom L., Rutqvist L.E., Wall S., et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 341 (1993) 973-978
2. Andersson I., and Janzon L. Reduced breast cancer mortality in women under age 50: updated results from the Malmo mammographic screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 22 (1997) 63-67
3. Bjurstam N., Bjorneld L., Duffy S.W., et al. The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence and mode of detection for women ages 39-49 years at randomisation. Cancer 80 (1997) 2091-2099
4. Tabar L., Yen M.F., Vitak B., et al. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet 361 (2003) 1405-1410
5. Blanks R.G., Moss S., and Wallis M.G. Monitoring and evaluating the UK national health service breast screening program: evaluating the variation in radiological performance between individual programs using PPV-referral diagrams. J Med Screen 8 (2001) 24-28
6. Pisano E.D., and Yaffe M.J. Digital mammography. Radiology 234 (2005) 353-362
7. The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare: cancer incidence in Sweden 2000-2004.
8. Siemens Medical Systems, Mammomat 2 User Manual.
9. Smith J.A., and Andreopoulou E. An overview of the status of imaging screening technology for breast cancer. Ann Oncol 15 (2004) i18-i26
10. Siemens Medical Systems, Siemens Mammomat 3000 Nova user manual.
11. Hemdal B., Andersson I., Klang A.T., et al. Mammography-recent technical developments and their clinical potential (2002), Swedish Radiation Protection Authority
12. Danielsson M., Bornefalk H., Cederström B., et al. Dose-efficient system for digital mammography. Proceedings of the SPIE physics of medical imaging, vol. 3977 (2000) 239-249
13. Åslund M., Cederström B., Lundqvist M., and Danielsson M. Scatter rejection in multislit digital mammography. Med Phys 33 4 (2006) 933-940
14. The Swedish Radiation Protection Authority. Regulations on X-ray diagnostics, SSI FS 2000:2; 2000.
15. The KODAK MIN-R mammography screen/film systems user guide, KODAK, 2004.
16. Service manual, FCR XG-1/5000 plus, CR-IR346/348CL. Document no. 010-054-03, 4th ed. Fuji Photo Film Co. Ltd.; 2001.
17. Control procedures-MicroDose Mammography, Sectra Imtec AB 2004.
18. European protocol on dosimetry in mammography. European Commission (1996) EUR 16263.
19. Hemdal B., Herrnsdorf L., Andersson I., Bengtsson G., Heddson B., and Olsson M. Average glandular dose in routine mammography screening using a Sectra Microdose Mammography unit. Radiat Prot Dosim 114 (2005) 436-443
20. The Swedish Radiation Protection Authority. Regulations and general advice on diagnostic standard doses and reference levels within medical X-ray diagnostics, SSI FS 2002:2; 2002.
21. Pisano E.D., et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. NEJM 353 (2005) 1773-1783
22. Skaane P., Young K., and Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading-Oslo I study. Radiology 229 (2003) 877-884
23. Skaane P., and Skjennald A. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program-the Oslo II Study. Radiology 232 (2004) 197-204
24. Lewin J.M., D'Orsi C.J., Hendrick R.E., et al. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol 179 (2002) 671-677
25. Lewin J.M., Hendrick R.E., D'Orsi C.J., et al. Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology 218 (2001) 873-880
26. Lewin J.M., D'Orsi C.J., and Hendrick R.E. Digital mammography. Radiol Clin North Am 42 (2004) 871-884 vi
27. Thurfjell E.L., Lernevall K.A., and Taube A.A.S. Benefit of independent double reading in a population based mammography screening programme. Radiology 191 (1994) 241-244
28. Anderson E.D.C., Muir B.B., Walsh J.S., et al. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast cancer. Clin Radiol 49 (1994) 248-251
29. Denton E.R.E., and Field S. Just how valuable is double reporting in screening mammography?. Clin Radiol 52 (1997) 466-468