Abstract
In our country, decentralized screening using full field digital mammography (FFDM) is allowed since 2005. Next to physical technical constancy checks, other QA activities in digital mammography aim to ensure the proper functioning of the complete imaging chain, from positioning of the patient until the reading of the images. Radiologists in the center for second reading were asked to carefully control the quality of the individual mammograms acquired in different locations. The artifacts seen in images from 3 Fuji CR (FCR Profect, Japan) systems, 1 Agfa CR (Agfa-HealthCare, Belgium) system, 2 Hologic Lorad Selenia (Hologic, Inc., Danbury, CT) systems, 1 Novation (Siemens, Germany) system and 1 DM 1000 Agfa DR (Agfa-HealthCare, Belgium) system were registered, the origin of the artifacts was determined, the artifacts were then categorized and solutions were discussed. Our data underline the need to control the daily quality of digital mammograms. A digital registration system of artifacts in clinical screening images is suggested.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Van Engen, R., Young, K., Bosmans, H., et al.: The European protocol for the quality control of the physical and technical aspects of mammography screening. Part B: Digital mammography. In: The Fourth Edition of the European Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening (2005), http://www.euref.org
Hogge, P.J., Palmer, C.H., Muller, C.C., et al.: Quality assurance in mammography artifact analysis. Radiographics 19, 503–522 (1999)
Bassett, L.W.: Quality determinants of mammography: clinical image evaluation. In: Kopans, D.B., Mendelson, E.B. (eds.) Syllabus: a categorical course in breast imaging. Oak Brook, III: Radiological Society of North America, pp. 57–67 (1995)
Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Part 14: gray-scale standard display function, NEMA PS 3.14, Rosslyn, Va: National Electrical Manufacturers Association (2000)
Jacobs, J., Rogge, F., Kotre, J., et al.: Preliminary validation of a new variable pattern for daily quality assurance of medical image display device. Med. Phys. 34(7), 2744–2758 (2007)
Saunders Jr., R.S., Baker, J.A., Delong, D.M., et al.: Does image quality matter? Impact of resolution and noise on mammographic task performance. Med. Phys. 34(10), 3971–3981 (2007)
Van Ongeval, C., Van Steen, A., Bosmans, H.: Teaching syllabus for radiological aspects of breast cancer screening with digital mammography. Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry (in print, 2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Van Ongeval, C., Jacobs, J., Van Steen, A., Zanca, F., Bosmans, H., Marchal, G. (2008). Classification of Artifacts in Clinical Digital Mammography. In: Krupinski, E.A. (eds) Digital Mammography. IWDM 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5116. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70538-3_103
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70538-3_103
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-70537-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70538-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)