Digital mammography: what do we and what don't we know?

被引:44
作者
Bick, Ulrich [1 ]
Diekmann, Felix [1 ]
机构
[1] Charite Univ Med Berlin, Dept Radiol, D-10117 Berlin, Germany
关键词
digital mammography; breast cancer screening; image processing; workflow; quality assurance; SCREEN-FILM MAMMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER-AIDED DETECTION; IMAGE QUALITY MEASUREMENTS; FULL-FIELD MAMMOGRAPHY; SOFT-COPY DISPLAY; BREAST-CANCER; CURRENT STATE; PIXEL SIZE; FOLLOW-UP; OSLO-I;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-007-0586-1
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
High-quality full-field digital mammography has been available now for several years and is increasingly used for both diagnostic and screening mammography. A number of different detector technologies exist, which all have their specific advantages and disadvantages. Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography has been shown to be at least equivalent to film-screen mammography in a general screening population. Digital mammography is superior to screen-film mammography in younger women with dense breasts due to its ability to selectively optimize contrast in areas of dense parenchyma. This advantage is especially important in women with a genetic predisposition for breast cancer, where intensified early detection programs may have to start from 25 to 30 years of age. Tailored image processing and computer-aided diagnosis hold the potential to further improve the early detection of breast cancer. However, at present no consensus exists among radiologists on which processing is optimal for digital mammograms. Image processing may also vary significantly among vendors with so far limited interoperability. This review aims to summarize the available information regarding the impact of digital mammography on workflow and breast cancer diagnosis.
引用
收藏
页码:1931 / 1942
页数:12
相关论文
共 68 条
[61]   Threshold pixel size for shape determination of microcalcifications in digital mammography:: A pilot study [J].
Ruschin, M ;
Hemdal, B ;
Andersson, I ;
Börjesson, S ;
Håkansson, M ;
Båth, M ;
Grahn, A ;
Tingberg, A .
RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY, 2005, 114 (1-3) :415-423
[62]   Follow-up and final results of the Oslo I study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading [J].
Skaane, P ;
Skjennald, A ;
Young, K ;
Egge, E ;
Jebsen, I ;
Sager, EM ;
Scheel, B ;
Sovik, E ;
Ertzaas, AK ;
Hofvind, S ;
Abdelnoor, M .
ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2005, 46 (07) :679-689
[63]   Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: Randomized trial in a population-based screening program - The Oslo II study [J].
Skaane, P ;
Skjennald, A .
RADIOLOGY, 2004, 232 (01) :197-204
[64]   Population-based mammography screening: Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading - Oslo I study [J].
Skaane, P ;
Young, K ;
Skjennald, A .
RADIOLOGY, 2003, 229 (03) :877-884
[65]  
*US FDA CTR DEV RA, 2006, MAMM INF MAMM FAC PE
[66]   Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting [J].
Venta, LA ;
Hendrick, RE ;
Adler, YT ;
DeLeon, P ;
Mengoni, PM ;
Scharl, AM ;
Comstock, CE ;
Hansen, L ;
Kay, N ;
Coveler, A ;
Cutter, G .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2001, 176 (05) :1241-1248
[67]   DETECTION OF RADIOGRAPHIC ABNORMALITIES IN MAMMOGRAMS BY MEANS OF OPTICAL SCANNING AND COMPUTER ANALYSIS [J].
WINSBERG, F ;
ELKIN, M ;
MACY, J ;
BORDAZ, V ;
WEYMOUTH, W .
RADIOLOGY, 1967, 89 (02) :211-&
[68]  
YOUNG KC, 2006, LNCS, V4046