Skip to main content
Erschienen in: European Radiology 6/2006

01.06.2006 | Breast

Evaluation of the diagnostic value of a computed radiography system by comparison of digital hard copy images with screen–film mammography: results of a prospective clinical trial

verfasst von: C. Van Ongeval, H. Bosmans, A. Van Steen, K. Joossens, V. Celis, M. Van Goethem, I. Verslegers, K. Nijs, F. Rogge, G. Marchal

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 6/2006

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to determine prospectively the diagnostic value of a computed radiography (CR) system by comparing mammographic hard copy images with screen–film mammography (SFM). A series of 100 patients, who came for diagnostic investigation, underwent two-view SFM (Lorad M-IV Platinum) and digital mammography with a CR system (AGFA CR system). The images were obtained by double exposure, i.e. same view without removing compression of the corresponding breast. The CR images were processed with dedicated processing for mammography. Six radiologists read sets of SFM and CR images. The primary efficacy parameter was the overall diagnostic value. The secondary efficacy parameters were lesion conspicuity and lesion details (for masses and micro-calcifications), tissue visibility at chest wall and at skin line, axillary details, overall density and sharpness impression and the overall noise impression. These parameters were scored by a 7-point scoring system. “CR non-inferior to SFM” was concluded if the lower confidence interval bound exceeded 80%. The confidence interval for the overall diagnostic value was between 96.4% and 100%. Pooled analysis of the ten features for image quality comparison demonstrated for all but one feature (lesion details of the calcifications) CR non-inferiority to SFM.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Yaffe MJ (2000) Digital mammography. In: Beutel J, Kundel HL, Van Metter RL (eds) Handbook of medical imaging, physics and psychophysics, vol. 1. SPIE, Bellingham, WA Yaffe MJ (2000) Digital mammography. In: Beutel J, Kundel HL, Van Metter RL (eds) Handbook of medical imaging, physics and psychophysics, vol. 1. SPIE, Bellingham, WA
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Noel A, Thibault F (2004) Digital detectors for mammography: the technical challenges. Eur Radiol 14:1990–1998PubMedCrossRef Noel A, Thibault F (2004) Digital detectors for mammography: the technical challenges. Eur Radiol 14:1990–1998PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat American College of Radiology (ACR) (2004) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia American College of Radiology (ACR) (2004) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Vuylsteke P, Schoeters E (1994) Multiscale image contrast amplification (MUSICA). Proc SPIE 2167:551–560CrossRef Vuylsteke P, Schoeters E (1994) Multiscale image contrast amplification (MUSICA). Proc SPIE 2167:551–560CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Munzel U, Baum F, Grabbe E (2002) Screen film vs full-field digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions. Eur Radiol 12:1697–1702PubMedCrossRef Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Munzel U, Baum F, Grabbe E (2002) Screen film vs full-field digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions. Eur Radiol 12:1697–1702PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Cole EB, Pisano ED, Kistner EO (2003) Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem- solving mammography: effects of image processing and lesion type. Radiology 226:153–160PubMedCrossRef Cole EB, Pisano ED, Kistner EO (2003) Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem- solving mammography: effects of image processing and lesion type. Radiology 226:153–160PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Pisano ED, Cole EB, Hemminger BM, Jaffe MJ (2000) Image processing algorithms for digital mammography: a pictorial essay. Radiographics 20:1479–1491PubMed Pisano ED, Cole EB, Hemminger BM, Jaffe MJ (2000) Image processing algorithms for digital mammography: a pictorial essay. Radiographics 20:1479–1491PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Lewin FM, Hendrick RE, D’Orsi CJ, Isaacs MF (2001) Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen–film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology 218:873–880PubMed Lewin FM, Hendrick RE, D’Orsi CJ, Isaacs MF (2001) Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen–film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology 218:873–880PubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A (2003) Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen–film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading—the Oslo I study. Radiology 229:877–884PubMedCrossRef Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A (2003) Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen–film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading—the Oslo I study. Radiology 229:877–884PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Skaane P, Skjennald A (2004) 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 232:197–204PubMedCrossRef Skaane P, Skjennald A (2004) 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 232:197–204PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, van Heyden D, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E (2002) Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full-field digital mammography vs screen–film mammography. Eur Radiol 12:2679–2683PubMed Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, van Heyden D, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E (2002) Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full-field digital mammography vs screen–film mammography. Eur Radiol 12:2679–2683PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Matzek WK, Pfarf G (2004) Digital storage phosphor mammography versus direct full field digital mammography for detection of breast cancer. Eur Radiol ECR report B-036, ECR 2004. Vol 14 Suppl 2, Feb 2004 Matzek WK, Pfarf G (2004) Digital storage phosphor mammography versus direct full field digital mammography for detection of breast cancer. Eur Radiol ECR report B-036, ECR 2004. Vol 14 Suppl 2, Feb 2004
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, Conant EF, Fajardo LL, Bassett L, D’Orsi C, Jong R, Rebner M (2005) Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773–1783PubMedCrossRef Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, Conant EF, Fajardo LL, Bassett L, D’Orsi C, Jong R, Rebner M (2005) Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773–1783PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Quam JP, Ackerman SJ (2003) Conspicuity and characterization of findings on computed radiography for mammography vs screen–film mammography: results from a prospective clinical trial. RSNA report no. 544 Quam JP, Ackerman SJ (2003) Conspicuity and characterization of findings on computed radiography for mammography vs screen–film mammography: results from a prospective clinical trial. RSNA report no. 544
Metadaten
Titel
Evaluation of the diagnostic value of a computed radiography system by comparison of digital hard copy images with screen–film mammography: results of a prospective clinical trial
verfasst von
C. Van Ongeval
H. Bosmans
A. Van Steen
K. Joossens
V. Celis
M. Van Goethem
I. Verslegers
K. Nijs
F. Rogge
G. Marchal
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2006
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
European Radiology / Ausgabe 6/2006
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0134-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2006

European Radiology 6/2006 Zur Ausgabe

Letter to the Editor

Reply of Editor-in-Chief

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

28.04.2024 Schwindel Nachrichten

Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

18.04.2024 Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin Nachrichten

Im Choosing-Wisely-Programm, das für die deutsche Initiative „Klug entscheiden“ Pate gestanden hat, sind erstmals Empfehlungen zum Umgang mit Notfällen von Kindern erschienen. Fünf Dinge gilt es demnach zu vermeiden.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.