PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
2008 | 14 | 2 | 87-98
Article title

Evaluation of the potential in radiation dose reduction for full-field digital mammography

Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
This study evaluates the image quality for different radiation doses in full-field digital mammography (FFDM). The potential of dose reductions is evaluated for both, the transition from screen-film mammography (SFM) to FFDM as well as within FFDM due to the optimization of exposure parameters.Exposures of a 4.5 cm breast phantom rendering different contrasts as well as bar patterns were made using a FFDM system (GE Senographe 2000D). For different kVp and mAs settings as well as different target/filter combinations chosen for the above exposures, average glandular dose (AGD), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and modulation transfer function (MTF) were determined. To benchmark the results, relative change of AGD was evaluated against SNR, CNR and MTF. Eventually, the results were normalized to AGD's rendered by settings typically used in today's clinical routine.For standard settings (automatic mode), both FFDM and SFM deliver approximately the same AGD of about 2.2 mGy. From that, AGD reduction can be substantial in FFDM if only SNR and high contrast CNR are considered. In this case, reduction of up to 40% can be achieved in a wide kVp range if switching from the standard target/filter combination Mo/Rh to Rh/Rh. However, if low contrast CNR is to remain unchanged, dose reduction is practically impossible. The change of peak voltage and target/filter material had no influence on MTF.Assuming current CNR requirements as standards, significant dose reduction in FFDM cannot be achieved. Only by compromising low contrast CNR levels AGD of up to 40% can be saved at current standards of SNR and high contrast CNR.
Publisher
Year
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
87-98
Physical description
Dates
published
1 - 1 - 2008
online
14 - 4 - 2009
References
  • American College of Radiology, Mammography Quality Control Manual. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, 1999
  • Young KC. Radiation doses in the UK trial of breast screening in women aged 40-48 years. Br J Radiol. 2002; 75: 362-370.
  • Chevalier M, Moran P, Ten J, Soto J, Cepeda T, Vano E. Patient dose in digital mammography. Med Phys. 2004; 31(9): 2471-2479.[PubMed][Crossref]
  • Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Schorn C, Fischer U, Grabbe E. Full-field digital mammography: dose-dependent detectability of simulated breast lesions. Fortschr Rontgenstr. 2000; 172: 1052-1056.
  • Kruger RL, Schueler BA. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography. Med Phys. 2001; 28(7): 1449-1454.[Crossref][PubMed]
  • Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E. Dose reduction in full-field digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study. Br J Radiol. 2003; 76: 478-482.[PubMed]
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.-psjd-doi-10_2478_v10013-008-0008-y
Identifiers
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.