Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper • new

Breast compression parameters among women imaged with full field digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis in BreastScreen Norway
Author(s): G. G. Waade; Åsne Holen; B. Hanestad; S. Sebuødegård; N. Moshina; K. Pedersen; Hofvind
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

Background

Breast compression is used in mammography to improve image quality and reduce radiation dose. However, the compression may lead to discomfort or pain for the women. Breast compression time is longer with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) than with digital mammography (DM). We aimed to explore breast compression parameters with DM and DBT.

Material and Methods

We used information from 16,832 women participating in the Tomosynthesis Trial in Bergen between January 2016 and April 2017. We compared mean values of applied compression force (N), compression pressure (kPa) and compressed breast thickness (mm) for DM and DBT, by view (craniocaudal, CC, and mediolateral-oblique, MLO). Two-sample ttests were used to test statistical significance.

Results

Number of women screened with DM or DBT were similar (DM: n= 8354 and DBT: n= 8478). Mean compression force was statistically significantly higher for DM compared to DBT (CC: 108.6 N versus 102.7 N; MLO: 122.4 N versus 120.8 N, p <0.01). Mean compression pressure was higher for DM compared to DBT for CC view (13.9 kPa versus 13.0 kPa, p<0.01), however, not for MLO view (DM and DBT: 9.7 kPa, p= 0.55). Mean compressed breast thickness did not differ statistically significantly for DM compared to DBT (CC: 58.7 mm N versus 58.6 mm, p= 0.72; MLO: 60.1 mm versus 59.9 mm, p= 0.23).

Conclusion

Radiographers applied less breast compression with DBT compared to DM. However, the observed differences were negligible. Further research should investigate the clinical implications of the differences, such as image quality.

Paper Details

Date Published: 6 July 2018
PDF: 6 pages
Proc. SPIE 10718, 14th International Workshop on Breast Imaging (IWBI 2018), 1071802 (6 July 2018); doi: 10.1117/12.2317918
Show Author Affiliations
G. G. Waade, Oslo Metropolitan Univ. (Norway)
Åsne Holen, The Cancer Registry of Norway (Norway)
B. Hanestad, Haukeland Univ. Hospital (Norway)
S. Sebuødegård, The Cancer Registry of Norway (Norway)
N. Moshina, The Cancer Registry of Norway (Norway)
K. Pedersen, The Cancer Registry of Norway (Norway)
Hofvind, Oslo Metropolitan Univ. (Norway)
The Cancer Registry of Norway (Norway)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 10718:
14th International Workshop on Breast Imaging (IWBI 2018)
Elizabeth A. Krupinski, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top