Clinical dose performance of full field digital mammography in a breast screening programme

British Journal of Radiology

Volumn 84, Issue 1007, 2011, Pages 1027-1033

  McCullagh, J B ^a   Baldelli, P ^b   Phelan, N ^b  

^a BreastCheck   (Ireland)

^b BreastCheck   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST EXAMINATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; FULL FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; X RAY;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BREAST; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, RADIATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IRELAND; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 80054753235     PISSN: 00071285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/bjr/83821596     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Hambly N, McNicholas M, Phelan N, Hargaden G, O'Doherty A, Flanagan F. Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the Irish breast screening programme: a review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:1010-18.
2. Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, et al. Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population based screening program. Radiology 2009;253: 353-8.
3. Berns EA, Hendrick RE, Cutter GR. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose. Med Phys 2003;30:334-40. (Pubitemid 36337099)
4. Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E. Dose reduction in fullfield digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study. Br J Radiol 2003;76:478-82. (Pubitemid 36903363)
5. Gennaro G, Baldelli P, Taibi A, di Maggio C, Gambaccini M. Patient dose in full-field digital mammography: an Italian survey. Eur J Radiol 2004;14:645-52. (Pubitemid 38444578)
6. Balter S. Patient dose in mammography. Radiographics 1990;10:739-46.
7. Baldelli P, Phelan N, Egan G. Investigation of the effect of anode/filter materials on the dose and image quality of a digital mammography system based on an amorphous selenium flat panel detector. Br J Radiol 2010;83:290-5.
8. Bernhardt P, Mertelmeier T, Hoheisel M. X-ray spectrum optimization of full-digital mammography: simulation and phantom study. Med Phys 2006;33:4337-49. (Pubitemid 44673124)
9. Pisano ED, Yaffe MJ. Digital mammography. Radiology 2005;234:353-62. (Pubitemid 40139903)
10. Aslund M, Cederstrom B, Lundqvist M, Danielsson M. AEC for scanning digital mammography based on variation of scan velocity. Med Phys 2005;32:3367-74. (Pubitemid 41689289)
11. Council Directive 97/43/Euratom on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposures. OJEU L180, 9.7.97, p. 22
12. Chevalier M, Moran P, Ten JI, Fernandez Soto JM, Cepeda T, Vano E. Patient dose in digital mammography. Med Phys 2004;31:2471-9. (Pubitemid 39287861)
13. Shramchenko N, Blin P, Mathey C, Klausz R. Optimised exposure control in digital mammography. Proc SPIE 2004;5368:445-456.
14. Hologic. Tungsten Anode (W) AEC/TEC Tables. In: Selenia calibration and software maintenance manual. Bedford, MA, USA, 2007: Appendix C:C18-C29.
15. Sectra, 2007. In: Technical specification - Sectra Micro Dose L30 software v8.0. Revision 1007996C.
16. Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L, editors. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 4th edn. Luxemburg: European Commission, 2006.
17. Dance DR, 1990 Monte Carlo calculation of conversion factors for estimation of mean glandular breast dose. Phys Med Biol 35:1211-9. (Pubitemid 20264595)
18. Dance DR, Skinner CL, Young KC, Beckett JR, Kotre CJ. Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular dose using UK mammography protocol. Phys Med Biol 2000;45:801-13.
19. Dance DR, Young KC, van Engen RE. Further factors for the estimation of mean glandular dose using the United Kingdom, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols Phys Med Biol 2009;54:4361-72.
20. Wu X, Barnes GT, Tucker MT. Spectral dependence of glandular tissue dose in screen-film mammography. Radiology 1991;179:143-8.
21. Young KC. Breast dose surveys in the NHSBSP: software and instruction manual. NHSBSP Report 01/10 2001.
22. Young KC, Burch A, Oduko JM. Radiation doses received in the UK breast screening programme in 2001 and 2002. Br J Radiol 2005;78:207-18. (Pubitemid 40467642)
23. Hendrick RE, Pisano ED, Averbukh A, Moran C, Berns EA, Yaffe MJ, et al. Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen - film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial. AJR AM J Roentgenol 2010;194:362-9.
24. Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC. Computer-based collection of mammographic exposure data for quality assurance and dosimetry. Med Phys 2001;28:1546-51. (Pubitemid 32783199)
25. Robinson M, Kotre CJ. Trends in compressed breast thickness and radiation dose in breast screening mammography. Br J Radiol 2008;81:214-18. (Pubitemid 351547880)
26. Gkanatsios, NA. Training notes: digital mammography for the medical physicist. David Ellenbogen Center for Health Sciences Education, Hologic, 2008.