Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Comparison of 2D versus 3D mammography with screening cases: an observer study
Author(s): James Reza Fernandez; Ruchi Deshpande; Linda Hovanessian-Larsen; Brent Liu
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common type of non-skin cancer in women. 2D mammography is a screening tool to aid in the early detection of breast cancer, but has diagnostic limitations of overlapping tissues, especially in dense breasts. 3D mammography has the potential to improve detection outcomes by increasing specificity, and a new 3D screening tool with a 3D display for mammography aims to improve performance and efficiency as compared to 2D mammography. An observer study using human studies collected from was performed to compare traditional 2D mammography with this new 3D mammography technique. A prior study using a mammography phantom revealed no difference in calcification detection, but improved mass detection in 2D as compared to 3D. There was a significant decrease in reading time for masses, calcifications, and normals in 3D compared to 2D, however, as well as more favorable confidence levels in reading normal cases. Data for this current study is currently being obtained, and a full report should be available in the next few weeks.

Paper Details

Date Published: 6 April 2012
PDF: 4 pages
Proc. SPIE 8318, Medical Imaging 2012: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 831818 (6 April 2012); doi: 10.1117/12.912497
Show Author Affiliations
James Reza Fernandez, The Univ. of Southern California (United States)
Ruchi Deshpande, Image Processing and Informatics Lab., The Univ. of Southern California (United States)
Linda Hovanessian-Larsen, The Univ. of Southern California (United States)
Brent Liu, Image Processing and Informatics Lab., The Univ. of Southern California (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 8318:
Medical Imaging 2012: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment
Craig K. Abbey; Claudia R. Mello-Thoms, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top