在美国放射学院影像学网络数字乳腺摄影筛查试验中，数字乳腺摄影与屏片乳腺摄影的采集参数和乳腺剂量比较。
Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial.
机构信息
Department of Radiology, University of Colorado-Denver, Aurora, 80045, USA.
出版信息
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Feb;194(2):362-9. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.2114.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of our study was to compare the technical performance of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and screen-film mammography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial enrolled 49,528 women to compare FFDM and screen-film mammography for screening. For quality assurance purposes, technical parameters including breast compression force, compressed breast thickness, mean glandular dose, and the number of additional views needed for complete breast coverage were recorded and analyzed for both FFDM and screen-film mammography on approximately 10% of study subjects at each site.
RESULTS
Technical data were compiled on 5,102 study subjects at 33 sites. Clean data were obtained for 4,366 (88%) of those cases. Mean compression force was 10.7 dN for screen-film mammography and 10.1 dN for FFDM (5.5% difference, p < 0.001). Mean compressed breast thickness was 5.3 cm for screen-film mammography and 5.4 cm for FFDM (1.7% difference, p < 0.001). Mean glandular dose per view averaged 2.37 mGy for screen-film mammography and 1.86 mGy for FFDM, 22% lower for digital than screen-film mammography, with sizeable variations among digital manufacturers. Twelve percent of screen-film mammography cases required more than the normal four views, whereas 21% of FFDM cases required more than the four normal views to cover all breast tissue. When extra views were included, mean glandular dose per subject was 4.15 mGy for FFDM and 4.98 mGy for screen-film mammography, 17% lower for FFDM than screen-film mammography.
CONCLUSION
Our results show that differences between screen-film mammography and FFDM in compression force and indicated compressed breast thickness were small. On average, FFDM had 22% lower mean glandular dose than screen-film mammography per acquired view, with sizeable variations in average FFDM doses by manufacturer.
目的
我们的研究目的是比较全数字化乳腺摄影术（FFDM）和屏片乳腺摄影术的技术性能。
材料和方法
美国放射学院影像网络数字乳腺成像筛查试验招募了 49528 名女性，以比较 FFDM 和屏片乳腺摄影术的筛查效果。为了质量保证目的，在每个站点的大约 10%的研究对象中，记录并分析了包括乳房压迫力、压缩乳房厚度、平均腺体剂量和完成乳房覆盖所需的附加视图数量在内的技术参数，这些参数适用于 FFDM 和屏片乳腺摄影术。
结果
在 33 个站点上共对 5102 名研究对象进行了技术数据汇编。获得了其中 4366 例（88%）的清洁数据。屏片乳腺摄影术的平均压迫力为 10.7dN，FFDM 为 10.1dN（差异为 5.5%，p<0.001）。屏片乳腺摄影术的平均压缩乳房厚度为 5.3cm，FFDM 为 5.4cm（差异为 1.7%，p<0.001）。平均腺体剂量为每视图 2.37mGy，屏片乳腺摄影术为 1.86mGy，FFDM 为 22%，数字制造商之间存在显著差异。12%的屏片乳腺摄影术病例需要超过正常的四个视图，而 21%的 FFDM 病例需要超过四个正常视图才能覆盖所有乳房组织。当包括额外的视图时，FFDM 的每位患者的平均腺体剂量为 4.15mGy，屏片乳腺摄影术为 4.98mGy，FFDM 比屏片乳腺摄影术低 17%。
结论
我们的结果表明，屏片乳腺摄影术和 FFDM 之间在压迫力和指示的压缩乳房厚度方面的差异很小。平均而言，FFDM 每获得一个视图的平均腺体剂量比屏片乳腺摄影术低 22%，制造商之间的平均 FFDM 剂量存在显著差异。
Zotero 插件