Mammography image quality: Analysis of evaluation criteria using pectoral muscle presentation

Radiography

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 189-194

  Bentley, Kelly ^a   Poulos, Ann ^b   Rickard, Mary ^c  

^a Regional Imaging Riverina   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c Sydney Breast Clinic   (Australia)

Author keywords

Breast imaging; Image evaluation systems; Image quality; Mammography; Mediolateral oblique view; Pectoral muscle; PGMI; Quality assurance

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SIZE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PECTORAL MUSCLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

EID: 45149134490     PISSN: 10788174     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2007.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and National Breast Cancer Centre. Breast cancer in Australia: an overview, 2006 Cancer Series Number 34 (AIHW cat. No. CAN 29); 2006
2. Taber L., Duffy S.W., Vitak B., Chen H., and Prevost T.C. The natural history of breast carcinoma; What have we learned from screening?. Cancer 86 (1999) 449-462
3. Eklund G.W., Cardenosa G., and Parsons W. Assessing adequacy of mammographic image quality. Radiology 190 (1994) 297-307
4. Taplin S.H., Rutter C.M., Finder C., Mandelson M.T., Houn F., and White E. Screening mammography: clinical image quality and the risk of interval breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol 178 (2002) 797-803
5. Vyborny C.J., and Schmidt R.A. Mammography as a radiographic examination: an overview. Radiographics 9 4 (1989) 723-764
6. Eklund G.W., Cardenosa G., and Parsons W. The art of mammographic positioning. Radiol Clin North Am 30 1 (1992) 21-53
7. In: Tucker A.K., and Ng Y.Y. (Eds). Textbook of mammography. 2nd ed. (2001), Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh
8. National Health Service Breast Screening Program. Quality assurance guidelines for radiographers, 2000. NHSBSP Publication No 30 (Revised); 2000. ISBN 1-871997-81-X.
9. National Accreditation Standards BreastScreen Australia Quality Improvement Program (Revised). Australian Government Department of Health and Aging; 2001. ISBN 1-871997-81-X.
10. Royal American College of Radiologists. Mammography quality control manual; 1999
11. Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists. Mammography quality assurance program; 2002.
12. Long S.M. Handbook of mammography. 4th ed. (2000), Mammography Consulting Services, Edmonton
13. Moreira C., Svoboda K., Poulos A., Taylor R., Page A., and Rickard M. Comparison of the validity and reliability of two image classification systems for the assessment of mammogram quality. J Med Screen 12 (2005) 38-42
14. Naylor S., and York J. An evaluation of the use of pectoral muscle to nipple level as a component to assess the quality of the mediolateral oblique mammogram. Radiography 5 (1999) 107-110
15. Bassett L.W., Hirbawi I.A., and DeBruhl N. Mammographic positioning: evaluation from the viewbox. Radiology 188 (1993) 803-806
16. Bassett L.W., Farria D.M., Bansal S., and Hayes M.K. Reasons for failure of a mammography unit at clinical image review in the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program. Radiology 215 (2000) 698-702
17. Helvie M., Chan H., Adler D., and Boyd P.G. Breast thickness in routine mammograms: effect on image quality and radiation dose. Am J Roentenol 163 (1994) 1371-1374
18. Rickard M.T., Wilson E.A., Ferris A., and Blackett K.H. Positioning and quality control mammography today for radiographers, Central Sydney Breast X-Ray Programme (1992), RT Kelly, Sydney p. 47