Radiation Exposure of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography Compared With Full-Field Digital Mammography

被引:72
|
作者
Jeukens, Cecile R. L. P. N. [1 ]
Lalji, Ulrich C. [1 ]
Meijer, Eduard [1 ,2 ]
Bakija, Betina [1 ]
Theunissen, Robin [1 ]
Wildberger, Joachim E. [1 ,3 ]
Lobbes, Marc B. I. [1 ]
机构
[1] Maastricht Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, NL-6202 AZ Maastricht, Netherlands
[2] Maxima Med Ctr, Dept Clin Phys, Veldhoven, Netherlands
[3] GROW Sch Oncol & Dev Biol, Maastricht, Netherlands
关键词
breast cancer; mammography; CESM; CEDM; radiation dose; CANCER; UK;
D O I
10.1097/RLI.0000000000000068
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objectives: Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) shows promising initial results but comes at the cost of increased dose as compared with full-field digital mammography (FFDM). We aimed to quantitatively assess the dose increase of CESM in comparison with FFDM. Materials and Methods: Radiation exposure-related data (such as kilovoltage, compressed breast thickness, glandularity, entrance skin air kerma (ESAK), and average glandular dose (AGD) were retrieved for 47 CESM and 715 FFDM patients. All examinations were performed on 1 mammography unit. Radiation dose values reported by the unit were validated by phantom measurements. Descriptive statistics of the patient data were generated using a statistical software package. Results: Dose values reported by the mammography unit were in good qualitative agreement with those of phantom measurements. Mean ESAK was 10.5 mGy for a CESM exposure and 7.46 mGy for an FFDM exposure. Mean AGD for a CESM exposure was 2.80 mGy and 1.55 mGy for an FFDM exposure. Conclusions: Compared with our institutional FFDM, the AGD of a single CESM exposure is increased by 1.25 mGy (+81%), whereas ESAK is increased by 3.07 mGy (+41%). Dose values of both techniques meet the recommendations for maximum dose in mammography.
引用
收藏
页码:659 / 665
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Mammographic Artifacts on Full-Field Digital Mammography
    Jae Jeong Choi
    Sung Hun Kim
    Bong Joo Kang
    Byung Gil Choi
    ByungJoo Song
    Haijo Jung
    Journal of Digital Imaging, 2014, 27 : 231 - 236
  • [42] Advantages of gridless full-field digital mammography
    Nykänen, K
    Siltanen, S
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2003: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, PTS 1 AND 2, 2003, 5030 : 137 - 146
  • [43] Current status of full-field digital mammography
    Pisano, ED
    Yaffe, MJ
    Hemminger, BM
    Hendrick, RE
    Niklason, LT
    Maidment, ADA
    Kimme-Smith, CM
    Feig, SA
    Sickles, EA
    Braeuning, MP
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2000, 7 (04) : 266 - 280
  • [44] Evaluation of the potential in radiation dose reduction for full-field digital mammography
    Kasch, Kay-Uwe
    Moftah, Belal A.
    POLISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS AND ENGINEERING, 2008, 14 (02) : 87 - 98
  • [45] Scatter radiation intensities around full-field digital mammography units
    Judge, M. A.
    Keavey, E.
    Phelan, N.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2013, 86 (1021):
  • [46] Potential for patient radiation dose reduction with full-field digital mammography
    Gray, JE
    Princehorn, JA
    Pizzutiello, RJ
    Rego, AW
    Jing, Z
    RADIOLOGY, 1999, 213P : 150 - 150
  • [47] Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography in Breast Imaging
    Lancaster, Rachael B.
    Gulla, Shannon
    De Los Santos, Jennifer
    Umphrey, Heidi R.
    SEMINARS IN ROENTGENOLOGY, 2018, 53 (04) : 294 - 300
  • [48] Structured reports for contrast-enhanced spectral mammography
    Alvarez Sanchez, C.
    Arizaga Ramirez, M. C.
    Montes Fernandez, M.
    RADIOLOGIA, 2022, 64 : 98 - 105
  • [49] Validation of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography as Breast Imaging Modality Compared to Standard Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
    Bartolovic, Nina
    Peterko, Ana Car
    Avirovic, Manuela
    Ritosa, Doris Segota
    Dujmic, Emina Grgurevic
    Zujic, Petra Valkovic
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2024, 14 (14)
  • [50] Causes of differences between full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography interpretations in the Colorado/Massachusetts full-field digital mammography screening trial
    Lewin, JM
    D'Orsi, CJ
    Isaacs, P
    Moss, LJ
    Hendrick, RE
    RADIOLOGY, 2000, 217 : 199 - 199