The readout thickness versus the measured thickness for a range of screen film mammography (SFM) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) units

Hauge, IHR; Hogg, P; Szczepura, K; Connolly, P; McGill, G; Mercer, C

Abstract

PURPOSE: To establish a simple method to determine breast readout accuracy on mammography units. METHODS: A thickness measuring device (TMD) was used in conjunction with a breast phantom. This phantom had compression characteristics similar to human female breast tissue. The phantom was compressed, and the thickness was measured using TMD and mammography unit readout. Measurements were performed on a range of screen film mammography (SFM) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) units (8 units in total; 6 different models/manufacturers) for two different sized paddles and two different compression forces (60 N and 100 N).
RESULTS: The difference between machine readout and TMD for the breast area, when applying 100 N compression force, for non-flexible paddles was largest for GE Senographe DMR+ (24 cm x 30 cm paddle: +14.3%). For flexible paddles the largest difference occurred for Hologic Lorad Selenia (18 cm x 24 cm paddle: +26.0%).
CONCLUSIONS: None of the units assessed were found to have perfect correlation between measured and readout thickness. TMD measures and thickness readouts were different for the duplicate units from two different models/manufacturers.

Citation

Hauge, I., Hogg, P., Szczepura, K., Connolly, P., McGill, G., & Mercer, C. (2011). The readout thickness versus the measured thickness for a range of screen film mammography (SFM) and full-field digital mammography (FFDM) units. Medical Physics, 39(1), 263-271. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3663579

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Nov 2, 2011
• Online Publication Date: Dec 20, 2011
• Publication Date: Dec 20, 2011
• Deposit Date: Nov 3, 2011
• Publicly Available Date: Nov 3, 2011
• Journal: Medical Physics
• Print ISSN: 0094-2405
• Publisher: American Association of Physicists in Medicine
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 39
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 263-271
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3663579
• Publisher URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.3663579
• Related Public URLs: http://online.medphys.org/