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
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
复制标题
DOI：
10.2214/ajr.08.2114
复制
发表时间：
2010-02-01
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Gatsonis, Constantine
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hendrick, R. Edward;Pisano, Etta D.;Gatsonis, Constantine
目标。本研究的目的是比较全视野数字化乳腺摄影和屏幕胶片摄影的技术性能。材料和方法。美国放射成像网络数字乳房X光成像筛查试验招募了49,528名女性，比较FFDM和屏幕胶片乳房X光检查的筛查效果。出于质量保证的目的，在每个站点对大约10%的研究对象记录和分析了包括乳房压缩力、压缩的乳房厚度、平均腺体剂量以及完全覆盖乳房所需的额外观察次数在内的技术参数。结果：收集了33个站点5102名研究对象的技术数据。其中4366例(88%)获得了干净的数据。平均压缩力分别为10.7dN和10.1dN(相差5.5%，p<；0.001)。平均压缩乳房厚度分别为5 3 cm和5 4 cm(相差1.7%，p<；0.001)。屏幕胶片乳房X光照相的平均每张图像的腺体剂量为2.37mGy.FFDM1.86mGy.数字乳房X光照相比屏幕胶片乳房X光照相低22%，不同数字制造商之间的差异很大。12%的屏幕胶片乳房X光摄影需要超过正常的四个切面，而21%的FFDM病例需要超过四个正常的切面来覆盖所有乳房组织。当考虑额外的视角时，平均每个受试者的腺体剂量分别为4.15 mGY和4.98 mGY，比屏片钼靶低17%。结论：我们的研究结果显示，屏片钼靶摄影在压缩力和所显示的压缩乳房厚度方面的差异很小。平均而言，FFDM的平均腺体剂量比屏幕胶片乳房X光照相低22%，不同制造商的平均FFDM剂量有很大差异。
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare the technical performance of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and screen-film mammography.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial enrolled 49,528 women to compare FFDM and screen-film mammography for screening. For quality assurance purposes, technical parameters including breast compression force, compressed breast thickness, mean glandular dose, and the number of additional views needed for complete breast coverage were recorded and analyzed for both FFDM and screen-film mammography on approximately 10% of study subjects at each site.RESULTS. Technical data were compiled on 5,102 study subjects at 33 sites. Clean data were obtained for 4,366 (88%) of those cases. Mean compression force was 10.7 dN for screen-film mammography and 10.1 dN for FFDM (5.5% difference, p < 0.001). Mean compressed breast thickness was 5.3 cm for screen-film mammography and 5.4 cm for FFDM (1.7% difference, p < 0.001). Mean glandular dose per view averaged 2.37 mGy for screen-film mammography and 1.86 mGy for FFDM, 22% lower for digital than screen-film mammography, with sizeable variations among digital manufacturers. Twelve percent of screen-film mammography cases required more than the normal four views, whereas 21% of FFDM cases required more than the four normal views to cover all breast tissue. When extra views were included, mean glandular dose per subject was 4.15 mGy for FFDM and 4.98 mGy for screen-film mammography, 17% lower for FFDM than screen-film mammography.CONCLUSION. Our results show that differences between screen-film mammography and FFDM in compression force and indicated compressed breast thickness were small. On average, FFDM had 22% lower mean glandular dose than screen-film mammography per acquired view, with sizeable variations in average FFDM doses by manufacturer.