European Journal of Radiology
Volume 72, Issue 2 , Pages 258-265 , November 2009

Digital mammography: An update

  • R. Schulz-Wendtland

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author.
    • ,
  • M. Fuchsjäger

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    • ,
  • T. Wacker

      Affiliations

    • University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
    • ,
  • K.-P. Hermann

      Affiliations

    • Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany

Received 18 May 2009 ,Accepted 20 May 2009.

References 

  1. Lewin JM, D’Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, et al. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR. 2002;179:671–677
  2. Schulz-Wendtland R, Hermann KP, Lell M, et al. Phantomstudie zur Detektion simulierter Läsionen an fünf verschiedenen digitalen und einem konventionellen Mammographiesystem. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2004;176:1127–1132
  3. Skaane P, Skjennald A. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program—the Oslo II Study. Radiology. 2004;232:197–204
  4. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2006;353:1773–1783
  5. Schulz-Wendtland R, Becker N, Bock K, et al. Mammographie-Screening. Radiologe. 2007;47:359–369
  6. Addendum on Digital Mammography to chapter 2 of the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in brest cancer screening and diagnosis, European Protocol for the Quality Control of the physical and technical aspects of mammography screening, Fourth edition, European Commission, 2006.
  7. PAS 1054: Anforderungen und Prüfverfahren für digitale Mammographie-Einrichtungen, Normenausschuss Radiologie, März; 2005.
  8. Anlage 9.2 BMV-Ä/EKV: Versorgung im Rahmen des Programms zur Früherkennung von Brustkrebs durch Mammographie-Screening, Deutsches Ärzteblatt Nr. 18 vom 6. Mai; 2005. [S. A1309].
  9. Hermann KP, Funke M, Grabbe E. Physikalisch-technische Aspekte der digitalen Mammographie. Radiologe. 2002;42:256–260
  10. Schulz-Wendtland R, Hermann KP, Bautz W. Digitale Mammographie: Klinische Ergebnisse. Radiologe. 2005;45:255–263
  11. Fischer U, Hermann KP, Baum F. Digital mammography: current state and future aspects. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:38–44
  12. Hermann KP, Obenauer S, Marten K, et al. Average glandular dose with amorphous silicon full-field digital mammography—clinical results. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2002;174:696–699
  13. Gosch D, Jendraß S, Scholz M, et al. Strahlenexposition bei der digitalen Vollfeldmammographie mit einem Selen-Flachdetektor. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2006;178:693–697
  14. Schulz-Wendtland R, Hermann KP, Wenkel E, Böhner C, Lell M, Dassel MS, et al. Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Dosisreduktion durch Optimierung der Strahlenqualität bei digitaler Vollfeldmammographie mit einem Detektor auf Selenbasis. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2007;179:487–491
  15. Weigel S, Girnus R, Czywoydzinski J, et al. Digital mammography screening: average glandular dose and first performance parameters. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2007;179:892–895
  16. Skaane P, Kshirsagar A, Stapleton S, et al. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms. AJR. 2007;188:377–384
  17. Skaane P, Hofvind S, Skjennald A. Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mamography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening programm: follow-up and final results of Oslo II study. Radiology. 2007;244:708–717
  18. Schulz-Wendtland R, Hermann KP, Wenkel E, et al. Vergleich der klinischen Wertigkeit von Zielaufnahmen mit reduzierter Pixelgröße des Detektors und digitalem Monitorzooming bei der Beurteilung von Mikrokalzifikationen in der digitalen Mammographie. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2007;179:492–496
  19. Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, Shoughnessy KF O, et al. Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening Mammography and potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology. 2001;219:192–202
  20. Freer TW, Ullssey MJ. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospektive study of 12.860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology. 2001;220:781–786
  21. Funovics M, Schamp S, Helbich TH, et al. Evaluation eines computerassistierten Diagnosesystems in der Erkennung des Mammakarzinoms. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2001;173:218–223
  22. Malich A, Marx C, Facius M, et al. Tumour detection rate of a new commercially available computer-aided detection system. EJR. 2001;11:2454–2459
  23. Morton MJ, Whaley DH, Brandt KR. Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection: prospektive evaluation. Radiology. 2006;239:375–383
  24. Dean JC, Ilvento CC. Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers. AJR. 2006;187:20–28
  25. KO JM, Nickolas MJ, Mendel JB. Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography. AJR. 2006;187:1483–1491
  26. Brem RF, Rapelyea JA, Zisman G, et al. Evaluation of breast cancer with a computer-aided detection system by mammographic appearance and histopathology. Cancer. 2005;104:931–935
  27. Brem RF, Hoffmeister JW, Rapelyea JA. Impact of breast density on computer-aided detection for breast cancer. AJR. 2005;184:439–444
  28. Karssemeijer N, Otten JD, Verbeek AL, et al. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses in mammograms. Radiology. 2003;227:192–200
  29. Karssemeijer N. Computer-aided detection and interpretation in mammography. In:  Yaffe MJ editors. Digital mammography IWDM. Wisconsin: Medical Physics Publishing; 2000;p. 243–252
  30. Jiang Y, Nishikawa RM, Schmidt RA, et al. Potential of computer-aided diagnose to reduce variability in radiologists Interpretations of mammograms depicting microcalcifications. Radiology. 2001;227:192–200
  31. Bick U. Computerassistierte Diagnose in der Screeningmammographie. Radiologe. 1996;36:72–80
  32. Kegelmeyer WP, Prudeda JM, Bourland PD, et al. Computer-aided mammographic screening for spiculated lesions. Radiology. 1994;191:331–337
  33. Elter M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Wittenberg T. The prediction of breast cancer biopsy outcomes using two CAD approaches that both emphasize an intelligible decision process. Med Phys. 2007;23:4164–4172
  34. Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE, et al. Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology. 1997;205:399–406
  35. Schulz-Wendtland R, Wenkel E, Lell M, et al. Experimental Phantom Lesions Detectability Study using a digital Breast Tomosynthesis Prototype System. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2006;178:1219–1223
  36. Schulz-Wendtland R, Wenkel E, Lell M. Digital mammographic tomosynthesis system—first clinical results. EJR. 2007;17:250–251
  37. Diekmann F, Bick U. Tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced digital mammography: recent advances in digital mammography. EJR. 2007;17:3086–3092
  38. Schulz-Wendtland R, Wenkel E, Wacker T, et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography versus MR imaging: initial clinical experience. EJR. 2006;16:209
  39. Rafferty EA. Digital mammography: novel applications. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007;5:831–843
  40. Lawaczeck R, Diekmann F, Diekmann S. New contrast media designed for X-ray energy subtraction imaging in digital mammography. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:602–608
  41. Lindfors KK, Boone JM, Nelson TR, et al. Dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2008;246:725–733
  42. Schulz-Wendtland R. Mammakarzinom 2008–State of the Art, Trends, Kontroversen: Aus der Sicht des Diagnostikers. Gebfra. 2008;68:708–716

PII: S0720-048X(09)00359-3

doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.052

European Journal of Radiology
Volume 72, Issue 2 , Pages 258-265 , November 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution