PATIENT DOSES FROM SCREEN-FILM AND FULL-FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY IN A POPULATION-BASED SCREENING PROGRAMME

被引：23

作者：

Hauge, I. H. R. ^{[1
,2
]}

Pedersen, K. ^{[2
]}

Sanderud, A. ^{[1
]}

Hofvind, S. ^{[1
,3
]}

Olerud, H. M. ^{[2
,4
]}

机构：

[1] Oslo Univ Coll, Fac Hlth Sci, NO-0130 Oslo, Norway

[2] Norwegian Radiat Protect Author, NO-1332 Osteras, Norway

[3] Canc Registry Norway, NO-0304 Oslo, Norway

[4] Univ Oslo, Fac Math & Nat Sci, Dept Phys, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway

来源：

RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY | 2012年 / 148卷 / 01期

关键词：

SYSTEM; OPTIMIZATION; PARAMETERS;

D O I：

10.1093/rpd/ncq598

中图分类号：

X [环境科学、安全科学];

学科分类号：

08 ; 0830 ;

摘要：

The aim of this study was to compare mean glandular dose (MGD) in all full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and screen film mammography (SFM) systems used in a national mammography screening program. MGD from 31 screening units (7 FFDM and 24 SFM), based on an average of 50 women at each screening unit, representing 12 X-ray models (6 FFDM and 6 SFM) from five different manufacturers were calculated. The MGD was significantly lower for FFDM compared with SFM (craniocaudal): 1.19 versus 1.27 mGy, respectively, mediolateral oblique: 1.33 versus 1.45 mGy, respectively), but not all of the FFDM units provided lower doses than the SFM units. Comparing FFDMs, the photon counting scanning-slit technology provides significantly lower MGDs than direct and indirect conversion digital technology. The choice of target/filter combination influences the MGD, and has to be optimised with regard to breast thickness.

引用

页码：65 / 73

页数：9

共 24 条

[1]

Act and Regulations on Radiation Protection and Use of Radiation, 2010, ACT REGULATIONS RAD

[2]

[Anonymous], 2007, ANN ICRP

[3] Physical characterization of a scanning photon counting digital mammography system based on Si-strip detectors [J].

Aslund, Magnus ;

Cederstrom, Bjorn ;

Lundqvist, Mats ;

Danielsson, Mats .

MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2007, 34 (06) :1918-1925

[4] Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose [J].

Berns, EA ;

Hendrick, RE ;

Cutter, GR .

MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (03) :334-340

[5] Evaluation of detector dynamic range in the x-ray exposure domain in mammography: A comparison between film-screen and flat panel detector systems [J].

Cooper, VN ;

Oshiro, T ;

Cagnon, CH ;

Bassett, LW ;

McLeod-Stockmann, TM ;

Bezrukiy, NV .

MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (10) :2614-2621

[6] Further factors for the estimation of mean glandular dose using the United Kingdom, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols [J].

Dance, D. R. ;

Young, K. C. ;

van Engen, R. E. .

PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2009, 54 (14) :4361-4372

[7] Influence of anode/filter material and tube potential on contrast, signal-to-noise ratio and average absorbed dose in mammography: a Monte Carlo study [J].

Dance, DR ;

Klang, AT ;

Sandborg, M ;

Skinner, CL ;

Smith, IAC ;

Carlsson, GA .

BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2000, 73 (874) :1056-1067

[8] Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol [J].

Dance, DR ;

Skinner, CL ;

Young, KC ;

Beckett, JR ;

Kotre, CJ .

PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2000, 45 (11) :3225-3240

[9] Dose comparison between screen/film and full-field digital mammography [J].

Gennaro, Gisella ;

di Maggio, Cosimo .

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2006, 16 (11) :2559-2566

[10] Average glandular dose in routine mammography screening using a Sectra MicroDose Mammography unit [J].

Hemdal, B ;

Herrnsdorf, L ;

Andersson, I ;

Bengtsson, G ;

Heddson, B ;

Olsson, M .

RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY, 2005, 114 (1-3) :436-443

← 1 2 3 →