Abstract
21158 screening mammograms were obtained, 10024 acquired using full field digital mammography (FFDM) and 11134 acquired using film-screen mammography. For each mammogram, data were collected on recall for further assessment due to detection of microcalcification, use of needle biopsy, and presence of microcalcifications in biopsy specimens. 61.5% of women who had a core biopsy following digital mammography had microcalcifications detected, compared with 65.8% for analogue mammography but this difference was not significant (p=0.71). Rates of detection of microcalcifications in women screened by the two methods were similar. It was also found that the recall rate for assessment for women screened digitally (6.1%) was significantly higher than the recall rate for those screened by analogue mammography (3.3%), 95% confidence interval 2.2% - 3.4%. Screening using digital mammography leads to a higher recall rate for assessment than analogue mammography, although similar rates of detection of microcalcifications occur with both imaging modalities.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Sala, M., Comas, M., Macia, F., Martinez, J., Casamitjana, M., Castells, X.: Implementation of Digital Mammography in a Population based Breast Cancer Screening Program: Effect of Screening Round On Recall Rate and Cancer Detection. Radiology 252(1) (2009)
Pisano, E.D., Gatsonis, C., Hendrick, E., Yaffe, M., Baum, J.K., Acharyya, S., et al.: Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 353, 1773–1783 (2005)
Vinnicombe, S., Pereira, S.M.P., Mc Cormack, V., Shiel, S., dos Santos, S.I.: Full-Field Digital versus Screen-Film Mammography: Comparison within the UK Breast Screening Program and Systematic Review of Published Data. Radiology 251, 347–358 (2009)
Yankaskas, B.C., Cleveland, R.J., Schell, M.J., Kozar, R.: Association of Recall Rates with Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Values of Screening Mammography Am. J. Roentgenol. 177(3), 543–549 (2001)
Otten, J.D., Karssemeijer, N., Hendriks, J.H.C.L., Groenewoud, J.H., Fracheboud, J., Verbeek, A.L.M., de Koning, H.J., Holland, R.: Effect of Recall Rate on Earlier Screen Detection of Breast Cancers Based on the Dutch Performance Indicators. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 97(10), 748–754 (2005)
2009 Annual Report of the NHS Breast Screening Programme, http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/breastscreen/publications/nhsbsp-annualreview2009.pdf (accessed 12.03.10)
Fischer, U., Baum, F., Obenauer, S., Luftner-Nagel, S., Von Heyden, D., Vosshenrich, R., et al.: Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full-field digital mammography vs screen-film mammography. EurRadiol. 11, 2679–2683 (2002)
Del Turco, M.R., Mantellini, P., Ciatto, S., Bonardi, R., Martinelli, F., Lazzari, B., Houssami, N.: Full-Field Digital Versus Screen-Film Mammography: Comparative Accuracy in Concurrent Screening Cohorts. AJR 189, 860–866 (2007)
Obenauer, S., Luftner-Nagel, S., von Heyden, D., Munzel, U., Baum, F., Grabbe, E.: Screen film vs full-field digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions. Eur. Radiol. 12, 1697–1702 (2002)
Yamada, T., Ishibashi, T., Sato, A., et al.: Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography: image contrast and lesion characterization. Radiat. Med. 21, 166–171 (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Barr, N. et al. (2010). Comparison of Microcalcification Detection Rates and Recall Rates in Digital and Analogue Mammography. In: MartÃ, J., Oliver, A., Freixenet, J., MartÃ, R. (eds) Digital Mammography. IWDM 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6136. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13666-5_69
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13666-5_69
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-13665-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-13666-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)