Comparative performance of modern digital mammography systems in a large breast screening program

Medical Physics

Volumn 40, Issue 12, 2013, Pages

  Yaffe, Martin J ^a   Bloomquist, Aili K ^a   Hunter, David M ^a   Mawdsley, Gordon E ^a   Chiarelli, Anna M ^a,b   Muradali, Derek ^b   Mainprize, James G ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b CANCER CARE ONTARIO   (Canada)

^c Canada   (Canada)

Author keywords

Breast imaging; Computed radiography; Digital mammography; Image quality

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING; DISEASES; FAILURE ANALYSIS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL IMAGING; MODULATION; PHANTOMS; PROGRAM DIAGNOSTICS; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO; TRANSFER FUNCTIONS;

BREAST CANCER DETECTION; BREAST IMAGING; COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE; COMPUTED RADIOGRAPHY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY SYSTEM; LOW SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; NOISE EQUIVALENT QUANTA;

IMAGE QUALITY;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANADA; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PHANTOM; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; X RAY; BREAST TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT;

EID: 84890060600     PISSN: 00942405     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1118/1.4829516     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. A. M. Chiarelli, E. Halapy, V. Nadalin, R. Shumak, F. O'Malley, and V. Mai, " Performance measures from 10 years of breast screening in the Ontario Breast Screening Program, 1990/91 to 2000.," Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 15 (1), 34-42 (2006). 10.1097/01.cej.0000195713.02567.36
2. E. D. Pisano, C. Gatsonis, E. Hendrick, M. Yaffe, J. K. Baum, S. Acharyya, E. F. Conant, L. L. Fajardo, L. Bassett, C. D'Orsi, R. Jong, and M. Rebner, " Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography for breast cancer screening: The results of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST). " N. Engl. J. Med. 353, 1773-1783 (2005). 10.1056/NEJMoa052911
3. A. G. Haus and M. J. Yaffe, " Screen-film and digital mammography. Image quality and radiation dose considerations.," Radiol. Clin. North Am. 38, 871-98 (2000). 10.1016/S0033-8389(05)70207-4
4. M. J. Yaffe and J. A. Rowlands, " X-ray detectors for digital radiography.," Phys. Med. Biol. 42 (1), 1-39 (1997). 10.1088/0031-9155/42/ 1/001
5. Detectors for Digital Mammography, in Digital Mammography, Series: Medical Radiology; Subseries: Diagnostic Imaging, edited by, B. Ulrich, and, D. Felix, (Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg, 2010), Vol. XVI, p. 220.
6. A. Noel and F. Thibault, " Digital detectors for mammography: The technical challenges.," Eur. Radiol. 14, 1990-1998 (2004). 10.1007/s00330-004-2446-6
7. P. Monnin, D. Gutierrez, S. Bulling, D. Guntern, and F. R. Verdun, " A comparison of the performance of digital mammography systems.," Med. Phys. 34, 906-914 (2007). 10.1118/1.2432072
8. See http://www.sunnybrook.utoronto.ca/~yaffegrp/OBSP/Technologist/ OBSP%20Digital%20Mammography%20QC%20Technologist-Rev3.2-Final.pdf. Last accessed 14 March 2013.
9. A. K. Bloomquist, M. J. Yaffe, E. D. Pisano, R. E. Hendrick, G. E. Mawdsley, S. Bright, S. Z. Shen, M. Mahesh, E. L. Nickoloff, R. C. Fleischman, M. B. Williams, A. D. A. Maidment, D. J. Beideck, J. Och, and J. A. Seibert, " Quality control for digital mammography in the ACRIN DMIST trial: Part I.," Med. Phys. 33 (4), 719-736 (2006). 10.1118/1.2163407
10. International Atomic Energy Agency, Quality Assurance Programme for Digital Mammography IAEA Human Health Series 17 Subject Classification: 0103-Medical physics (including dosimetry) STI/PUB/1482, 2011.
11. A. M. Chiarelli, S. A. Edwards, M. V. Prummel, D. Muradali, V. Majpruz, S. J. Done, P. Brown, R. S. Shumak, and M. J. Yaffe, " Digital compared with screen- film mammography: Performance measures in concurrent cohorts within an organized breast screening program.," Radiology 268 (3), 684-693 (2013). 10.1148/radiol.13122567
12. E. Samei, M. J. Flynn and D. A. Reimann, " A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device.," Med. Phys. 25 (1), 102-113 (1998). 10.1118/1.598165
13. K. C. Young and J. M. Oduko, Evaluation of Kodak DirectView Mammography Computerised Radiography System National Coordinating Centre for the Physics of Mammography NHSBSP Equipment. Report 0504, December 2005, see www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk.
14. H. H. Barrett, J. P. Rolland, R. F. Wagner, and K. J. Myers, " Detection of known signals in inhomogeneous, random backgrounds.," Proc. SPIE 1090, 176-182 (1989). 10.1117/12.953202
15. A. K. Bloomquist, J. G. Mainprize, G. E. Mawdsley, and M. J. Yaffe, " A quality control framework using task-based detectability measurements for digital mammography.," Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 7361, 197-204 (2012). 10.1007/978-3-642-31271-7-26
16. P. Monnin, N. W. Marshall, H. Bosmans, F. O. Bochud, and F. R. Verdun, " Image quality assessment in digital mammography: Part II. NPWE as a validated alternative for contrast detail analysis.," Phys. Med. Biol. 56 (14), 4221-4238 (2011). 10.1088/0031-9155/56/14/003
17. A. E. Burgess and B. Colborne, " Visual signal detection. IV: Observer inconsistency.," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 5 (4), 617-627 (1988). 10.1364/JOSAA.5.000617
18. H. H. Barrett, J. L. Denny, R. F. Wagner, and K. J. Myers, " Objective assessment of image quality. II. Fisher information, Fourier crosstalk, and figures of merit for task performance.." J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 12 (5), 834-852 (1995). 10.1364/JOSAA.12.000834
19. A. E. Burgess, " Statistically defined backgrounds: Performance of a modified nonprewhitening observer model.," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11 (4), 1237-1242 (1994). 10.1364/JOSAA.11.001237
20. W. T. Sobol and X. Wu, " Parametrization of Mammography normalized average glandular dose tables.," Med. Phys. 24 (4), 547-554 (1997), see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9127307. 10.1118/1.597937
21. D. R. Dance, C. L. Skinner, K. C. Young, J. R. Beckett, and C. J. Kotre, " Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol.," Phys. Med. Biol. 45 (11), 3225-3240 (2000), see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11098900. 10.1088/0031-9155/45/11/308
22. D. R. Dance, K. C. Young, and R. E. van Engen, " Further factors for the estimation of mean glandular dose using the United Kingdom, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols.," Phys. Med. Biol. 54 (14), 4361-4372 (2009), see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19550001. 10.1088/0031-9155/54/ 14/002
23. See http://destinationsante.com/Mammographies-les-materiels-plus- severement-controles.html?debut-articles-recents=950. Last accessed 1 February 2013.
24. See http://www.sante.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Conf-presse-08-07-10-Enquete-menee- par-l-INCa-aupres-des-structures-de-gestion-sur-la-mammographie-numerique.pdf
25. R. Schulz-Wendtland, M. Lell, E. Wenkel, C. Böhner, M. S. Dassel, and W. Bautz, " DR (a-Se) versus CR (DLR) is an improvement of the accuracy possible? A retrospective histologic analysis (n = 100).," Rontgenpraxis 56 (4), 129-135 (2007). 10.1016/j.rontge.2006.10.001
26. H. Bosmans, A. De Hauwere, K. Lemmens, F. Zanca, H. Thierens, C. Van Ongeval, K. Van Herck, A. Van Steen, P. Martens, L. Bleyen, G. Vande Putte, E. Kellen, G. Mortier, and E. Van Limbergen, " Technical and clinical breast cancer screening performance indicators for computed radiography versus direct digital radiography.," Eur. Radiol. 23 (10), 2891-2898 (2013). 10.1007/s00330-013-2876-0
27. C. Van Ongeval, S. Postema, A. van Steen, G. Vande Putte, E. van Limbergen, F. Zancal, and H. Bosmans, " Performance of computed radiography and direct digital radiography in a screening setting: Effect on the screening indicators.," in IWDM 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, edited by, A. D. A. Maidment, P. R. Bakic, and, S. Gavenonis, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2012), Vol. 7361, pp. 189-196.
28. P. Leblans, L. Struye, and P. Williams, " A new needle-crystalline computed radiography detector.," J. Digit. Imaging 13 (1 Suppl.), 117-120 (2000). 10.1007/BF03167640