Share Email Print

Proceedings Paper

Technology assessment: observer study directly compares screen/film to CR mammography
Author(s): Lynn Fletcher-Heath; Anne Richards; Susan Ryan-Kron
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

A new study supports and expands upon a previous reporting that computed radiography (CR) mammography offers as good, or better, image quality than state-of-the-art screen/film mammography. The suitability of CR mammography is explored through qualitative and quantitative study components: feature comparison and cancer detection rates of each modality. Images were collected from 150 normal and 50 biopsy-confirmed subjects representing a range of breast and pathology types. Comparison views were collected without releasing compression, using automatic exposure control on Kodak MIN-R films, followed by CR. Digital images were displayed as both softcopy (S/C) and hardcopy (H/C) for the feature comparison, and S/C for the cancer detection task. The qualitative assessment used preference scores from five board-certified radiologists obtained while viewing 100 screen/film-CR pairs from the cancer subjects for S/C and H/C CR output. Fifteen general image-quality features were rated, and up to 12 additional features were rated for each pair, based on the pathology present. Results demonstrate that CR is equivalent or preferred to conventional mammography for overall image quality (89% S/C, 95% H/C), image contrast (95% S/C, 98% H/C), sharpness (86% S/C, 93% H/C), and noise (94% S/C, 91% H/C). The quantitative objective was satisfied by asking 10 board-certified radiologists to provide a BI-RADSTM score and probability of malignancy per breast for each modality of the 200 cases. At least 28 days passed between observations of the same case. Average sensitivity and specificity was 0.89 and 0.82 for CR and 0.91 and 0.82 for screen/film, respectively.

Paper Details

Date Published: 20 March 2007
PDF: 15 pages
Proc. SPIE 6515, Medical Imaging 2007: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 65151F (20 March 2007); doi: 10.1117/12.712702
Show Author Affiliations
Lynn Fletcher-Heath, Eastman Kodak Co. (United States)
Anne Richards, Eastman Kodak Co. (United States)
Susan Ryan-Kron, Eastman Kodak Co. (United States)

Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 6515:
Medical Imaging 2007: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment
Yulei Jiang; Berkman Sahiner, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top