Diagnostic reference levels for digital mammography in New South Wales

Suleiman, Moayyad E.; McEntee, Mark F.; Cartwright, Lucy; Diffey, Jennifer; Brennan, Patrick C.

doi:10.1111/1754-9485.12540

Cited by 28 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The calculation of MGD in our study followed the methods described by Dance et al 9,12,13 This method calculates MGD using entrance air kerma and three conversion factors that depend on age, CBT, half value layer (HVL), and anode/filter combination. A full explanation of the methodology has been previously described 29 (Figure 1). AGD in our work was calculated by replacing the original c factor values (6 in Figure 1) with Figure 1.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating mammographic breast density in glandular dose calculation

Suleiman

Brennan

Ekpo

et al. 2018

The British Journal of Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating mammographic breast density in glandular dose calculation

Suleiman

Brennan

Ekpo

et al. 2018

The British Journal of Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, international DRLs comparisons were found to be difficult (Suleiman et al, 2015). To overcome these variations and allow comparisons, it was suggested that DRLs should be correlated to the thickness of the compressed breast and equipment specifications (Suleiman et al, 2017).…”

Section: Mammography and Tomosynthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Phantom-based values is a method for evaluation of organ dose conversion coefficient in occupational, medical and environmental radiation protection. DRLs quantity measurements using phantoms are not typically the same as in the clinical environment (Suleiman et al, 2017). This is due to the limitations in variability of real patients' sizes using imaging protocols.…”

Section: Phantom-based Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards the Establishment of Diagnostic Reference Levels in Saudi Arabia: Review and Opinion

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T HIS STUDY aims at providing an overview and evaluation of the current situation of the national Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) in Saudi Arabia. Studies published in Pubmed and Google-Scholar, since the DRLs were proposed, are reviewed and general considerations are highlighted, by reviewing some established international DRLs, regarding x-rays and nuclear medicine modalities. The importance of national DRLs (Saudi DRLs) is introduced and discussed. An overview of some studies on Saudi DRLs regarding selected procedures is presented and the validity of radiation dosimetry studies for establishing Saudi DRLs is discussed. The establishment of DRLs for pediatric patient procedures is introduced, discussed and emphasized. An enormous amount of work is required to establish the Saudi DRLs for different procedures, as more than 90% of the work has not been accomplished. Collaboration between researchers is necessary to allow comparisons of DRLs results and to validate the establishment of Saudi DRLs. Furthermore, DRLs for pediatric patient procedures should take priority.

show abstract

“…As a relatively large group of specialized professionals, we have the resources to continually collect data and review results to ensure that equipment is not just satisfactory, but optimal; one example of this is the establishment of Diagnostic Reference Levels [45][46][47]. Throughout my career, it has been a privilege to work as part of a multidisciplinary team of dedicated mammography professionals, particularly radiographers and radiologists, who value the knowledge that a physicist brings to the field.…”

Section: The Role Of the Medical Physicistmentioning

confidence: 99%

How many physicists does it take to test a mammography unit?

Diffey¹

2017

Australas Phys Eng Sci Med

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mammography is defined as the X-ray examination of the breast. It is just one of the modalities used for breast imaging; ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are incredibly valuable adjunct techniques and newer technologies are gradually being adopted, such as molecular breast imaging and dedicated breast computed tomography. Inevitably, we tend to associate the term breast imaging with breast screening. Although breast screening has its critics [3], there can be no doubt that breast cancer is a major health burden on a global scale; it is the second most common cancer in the world and is responsible for more female deaths than any other cancer type [4]. Within Australia, 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer by the age of 85 [5]. However, it is reassuring to note that mortality rates are decreasing despite the fact that incidence rates continue to rise and the diagnosis rates in young women are increasing [6].Mammography is considered to be the gold standard for breast screening, having an overall sensitivity of about 85% and specificity of 90% [7] in women aged 50-70. Breast imaging is challenging since it is necessary to detect and classify pathological details (microcalcifications and masses) against a background of fibrous tissue, which can vary considerably in radiological appearance depending on breast thickness and composition.Microcalcifications have a relatively high atomic number and density and hence high inherent and subject contrast. Unfortunately they are generally very small in size, ranging from 10 µm through to several mm [8]. Although masses are of moderate size (5-10 mm), detection of carcinoma is difficult since malignant tissue has negligible physical density difference from fibrous breast tissue, a similar attenuation coefficient and therefore low inherent contrast I'm sorry to lure you in with a joke for which I don't have a punchline; the answer is just one, yet there are 95 physicists in Australia and New Zealand who hold ACPSEM Certification in Mammography Equipment Testing [1]. To put this into perspective, there are only 41 medical physicists who hold ACPSEM Certification in Radiology [2].This raises the questions of why mammography is the only radiology modality to have its own certification process and why there is so much demand for this qualification. Having spent 12 years specialising in mammography physics, I'll attempt to answer these questions and look at how mammographic technology has changed over the years and how this has impacted the role of the medical physicist.

show abstract

Diagnostic reference levels for digital mammography in New South Wales

Abstract: MGD is dependent upon compressed breast thickness and it is recommended that DRL values should be specific to compressed breast thickness and image detector technology.

Cited by 28 publications

References 27 publications

Integrating mammographic breast density in glandular dose calculation

Integrating mammographic breast density in glandular dose calculation

Towards the Establishment of Diagnostic Reference Levels in Saudi Arabia: Review and Opinion

How many physicists does it take to test a mammography unit?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About