Digitale Mammographie

R. Schulz-Wendtland; K.-P. Hermann; W. Bautz

doi:10.1055/s-2004-826138

Subscribe to RSS

Please copy the URL and add it into your RSS Feed Reader.

https://www.thieme-connect.de/rss/thieme/en/10.1055-s-00000118.xml

Share / Bookmark

Facebook X Linkedin Weibo

Download PDF

Radiologie up2date 2004; 4(4): 327-348
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-826138

Brustbildgebung/Mammographie

Digitale Mammographie

Digital MammographyR. Schulz-Wendtland¹ , K.-P. Hermann² , W. Bautz¹ W. Bautz (ohne Bild)

¹Institut für Diagnostische Radiologie, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
²Abteilung Diagnostische Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Göttingen

Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
13 January 2005 (online)

Also available at

Abstract
Full Text
References

Buy Article Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Zusammenfassung

Die digitale Mammographie ist ein Verfahren, das voraussichtlich die bisher praktizierte konventionelle Film-Folien-Mammographie ersetzen wird. In diesem Beitrag werden einleitend die Grundlagen der digitalen Mammographie erläutert und die bisher von der FDA zugelassenen digitalen Mammographiesysteme vorgestellt. Erste klinische Studien lassen vermuten, dass die digitale Mammographie im Vergleich zu konventionellen Film-Folien-Systemen zumindest als gleichwertig anzusehen ist.

Abstract

Digital mammography can be expected to replace the currently practiced conventional film-screen mammography. After explaining the principles of digital mammography, the FDA-approved digital mammography systems are presented. Initial clinical studies suggest that digital mammography is at least equal to conventional film-screen mammography.

Key words

Digital mammography - Computer-aided detection (CAD) - Mammography screening

Literatur

1 Bick U. Digitale Vollfeldmammographie. RöFo. 2000; 173 957-964

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
2 Grabbe E, Fischer U, Funke M, Hermann K P, Obenauer S, Baum F. Wert und Bedeutung der digitalen Vollfeldmammographie im Rahmen eines Mammographie-Screenings. Radiologe. 2001; 41 359-365

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
3 Hermann K P, Funke M, Grabbe E. Physikalisch-technische Aspekte der digitalen Mammographie. Radiologe. 2002; 42 256-260

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
4 Säbel M, Aichinger U, Schulz-Wendtland R, Bautz W. Digitale Vollfeld-Mammographie - Physikalische Grundlagen und klinische Aspekte. Röntgenpraxis. 1999; 52 171-177

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
5 Feig S A, Yaffe M J. Digital Mammography. Radio Graphics. 1998; 18 893-901

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
6 Schreer I. Auswertung der bisherigen Mammographie-Screening-Studien in Europa und in Nordamerika. Radiologe. 2001; 41 344-351

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
7 Nishikawa R M, Mawdsley G E, Fenster A, Yaffe M J. Scanned projection digital mammography. Med Phys. 1987; 14 717-727

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
8 European Commission. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Mammography Screening with Addendum on Digital Mammography. Luxembourg 2001/2003;
9 Busch H P. Digitale Projektionsradiographie - Technische Grundlagen, Abbildungseigenschaften und Anwendungsmöglichkeiten. Radiologe. 1999; 39 710-724

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
10 Neitzel U. Systeme für die digitale Bildgebung. In: Ewen K (ed) Moderne Bildgebung. Stuttgart; Thieme 1998: 127-136

Search in Google Scholar
11 Schulz R F. Digitale Vollfeld-Mammographie - Physikalische Grundlagen und klinische Aspekte. Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2001; 173 1137-1146

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
12 Obenauer S, Hermann K P, Schorn C, Funke M, Fischer U, Grabbe E. Digitale Vollfeldmammographie - Phantomstudie zur Detektion von Mikrokalk. RöFo. 2000; 172 646-650

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
13 Obenauer S, Hermann K P, Schorn C, Fischer U, Grabbe E. Digitale Vollfeldmammographie - Dosisabhängige Detektion von simulierten Herdbefunden und Mikrokalzifikationen. RöFo. 2000; 172 1052-1056

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
14 Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E. Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications - full-field digital mammography vs. screen-film mammography. Eur Radiol. 2002; 12 2679-2683

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
15 Grebe S, Dieckmann F, Bick U, Paepke S, Winzer K J, Hamm B. Initial clinical experiences with digital full-field mammography. Zentralbl Gynäkol. 2000; 122 589-594

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
16 Schulz-Wendtland R, Aichinger U, Lell U, Kuchar I, Tartsch M, Bautz W. Erfahrungen mit Phantommessungen an verschiedenen Mammographiesystemen. RöFo. 2002; 174 1243-1246

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
17 Venta L A, Hendrick R E, Adler Y T. et al . Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic setting. AJR. 2001; 176 1241-1248

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
18 Lewin J M, Hendrick R E, D’Orsi C J. et al . Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection - results of 4945 paired examinations. Radiology. 2001; 218 873-880

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
19 Lewin J M, D’Orsi C J, Hendrick R E, Moss L J, Isaacs P K, Karellas A, Cutter G R. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR. 2002; 179 671-677

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
20 Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening - comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading - Oslo I study. Radiology. 2003; 229 877-884

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
21 Hermann K P, Obenauer S, Grabbe E. Die Strahlenexposition bei der digitalen Vollfeldmammographie mit einem Flachdetektor aus amorphem Silizium im Vergleich zur konventionellen Film-Folien-Mammographie. RöFo. 2000; 172 1052-1056

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
22 Hermann K P, Obenauer S, Marten K, Kehbel S, Fischer U, Grabbe E. Mittlere Parenchymdosis bei der digitalen Vollfeldmammographie mit einem Detektor aus amorphem Silizium - Klinische Ergebnisse. RöFo. 2002; 174 696-699

Thieme Connect PubMed Search in Google Scholar
23 Skaane P, Skjennald A. Screen-Film Mammography versus Full-Field Digital Mammography with Soft-Copy Reading - Randomized Trial in a Population-based Screening Program (The Oslo II Study). Radiology. 2004; 232 197-204

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
24 Undrill P E, O’Kane A D, Gillbert F J. A comparison of digital and screen-film mammography using quality control phantoms. Clin Radiol. 2000; 55 782-790

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
25 Schulz-Wendtland R, Lell M, Wenkel E, Aichinger U, Imhoff K, Bautz W. Experimental investigations at the new digital mammography system. RöFo. 2003; 175 1564-1566

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
26 Schulz-Wendtland R, Wenkel E, Schmid A, Imhoff K, Bautz W. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with a conventional screen film system (SFS) and a new full-field digital mammography unit (DR) with a-Se detector. RöFo. 2003; 175 766-768

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
27 Schulz-Wendtland R, Aichinger U, Säbel M, Böhner C, Dobritz M, Bautz W. Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Bildgüte konventioneller Film-Folien-Mammographie, digitaler Mammographie mit Speicherfolien in Vergrößerungstechnik und voll digitaler Mammographie in CCD-Technik. RöFo. 2000; 172 965-968

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
28 Schulz-Wendtland R, Aichinger U, Säbel M, Böhner C, Dobritz M, Wenkel E, Bautz W. Expermental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD). Röntgenpraxis. 2002; 54 53-55

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
29 Pisano E D, Cole E B, Major S. et al . Radiologists’ preferences for digital mammographic display (The International Digital Mammography Development Group). Radiology. 2000; 216 820-830

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
30 Pisano E, Yaffe M, Hemminger B, Hendrick R, Niklason L. Current Status of Full-Field Digital Mammography. Acad Radiol. 2000; 7 266-280

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
31 Länderausschuss Röntgenverordnung. Mitteilung des Länderausschusses Röntgenverordnung von der Sitzung am 05./06. November 2003.
32 Birdwell R L, Ikeda D M, O’Shaughnessy K F, Sickles E A. Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening Mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology. 2001; 219 192-202

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
33 Funovics M, Schamp S, Helbich T H, Lackner B, Wunderbaldinger P, Fuchsjäger B, Lechner G, Wolf G. Evaluierung eines computerassistierten Diagnosesystems in der Erkennung des Mammakarzinoms. RöFo. 2001; 173 218-223

Thieme Connect PubMed Search in Google Scholar
34 Freer T W, Ullysey M J. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection - prospective study of 12.860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology. 2001; 220 781-786

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
35 Malich A, Marx C, Facius M, Boehm T, Fleck M, Kaiser W A. Tumour detection rate of a new commercially available computer-aided detection system. EUR. 2001; 11 2454-2459

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
36 Kegelmeyer W P, Prudeda J M, Bourland P D, Hillis A, Riggs M W, Nipper M L. Computer-aided mammographic screening for speculated lesions. Radiology. 1994; 191 331-337

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
37 Jiang Y, Nishikawa R M, Schmidt R A, Toledano A Y, Doi K. Potential of computer-aided diagnose to reduce variability in radiologists interpretations of mammograms depicting microcalcifications. Radiology. 2001; 220 787-794

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
38 Karssemeijer N, Otten J D, Verbeek A L, Groenwand J H, de Konning H J, Hendriks J H, Holland R. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses in mammograms. Radiology. 2003; 227 192-200

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
39 Karssemeijer N. Computer-aided detection and interpretation in mammography. In: Yaffe MJ (ed) Digital Mammography IWDM. Wisconsin; Medical Physics Publishing 2000: 243-252

Search in Google Scholar
40 Bick U. Computerassistierte Diagnose in der Screeningmammographie. Radiologe. 1996; 36 72-80

Crossref PubMed Search in Google Scholar
41 ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology). Guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 1999; 17 1312

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
42 Niklason L T, Christian B T, Niklason L E. et al . Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology. 1997; 205 399-406

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
43 Jong R H, Yaffe M J. et al . Contrast-enhanced digital Mammography - initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2003; 228 842-850

PubMed Search in Google Scholar
44 Lewin J M, Isaacs P K, Vance V, Larke F J. Dual-Energy contrast-enhanced Digital Subtraction Mammography. Radiology. 2003; 205 399-406

PubMed Search in Google Scholar

Prof. Dr. Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland

Institut für Diagnostische Radiologie, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg

Maximiliansplatz 1 · 91054 Erlangen

Phone: +49(0)9131853-3469, -3460

Fax: +49(0)9131853-2081

Email: Ruediger.Schulz-wendtland@idr.imed.uni-erlangen.de