Image Quality and Radiation Exposure in Mass Mammography Examinations : A Report from the Survey Group for Institutional Evaluation

Suzuki, Ryuji; Horita, Katsuhei; Asahara, Masayoshi; Koyama, Shuji; Sanada, Shigeru; H, Terada; Nishitani, Motohiro; Ishikawa, Mitsuo; Wakamaru, Akiko; Kurowarabi, Kunio; Negishi, Toru

doi:10.6009/jjrt.kj00000921797

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Estimation of the MGD for mammography examinations in Japan was performed using a questionnaire. The estimation of MGD was performed using data from 92 mammography units in Japan [8]. The dose to the breast of an individual patient is determined by a combination of three factors which are the characteristics of the equipment being used, the technique factors selected for the examination, and the size and density of the patient's breasts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…D gN is expressed in mGy per 2.58 × 10 −4 C kg −1 . In this study, D g was estimated from the radiographic conditions (a combination of target and filter, tube voltage, and mAs value) of 468 institutions participating in the 2011 questionnaire, based on the mean absorbed dose per mAs value (mGy mAs −1 ) of every tube voltage measured in 92 units (adopting the mean value which measured incident exposure in air and half-value layer of every tube voltage) in Japan [8], as shown in table 1.…”

Section: Estimation Of Mean Glandular Dose [7]mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Results of a 2011 national questionnaire for investigation of mean glandular dose from mammography in Japan

Asada

Suzuki

Minami³

et al. 2013

J. Radiol. Prot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for mammography have yet to be created in Japan. A national questionnaire investigation into radiographic conditions in Japan was carried out for the purpose of creating DRLs. Items investigated included the following: tube voltage; tube current; current-time product; source-image distance; craniocaudal view; automatic exposure control (AEC) settings; name of mammography unit; image receptor system (computed radiography (CR), flat panel detector (FPD), or film/screen (F/S)); and supported or unsupported monitor diagnosis (including monitor resolution). Estimation of the mean glandular dose (MGD) for mammography was performed and compared with previous investigations. The MGD was 1.58(0.48) mGy, which did not significantly differ from a 2007 investigation. In relation to image receptors, although no difference in average MGD values was observed between CR and FPD systems, F/S systems had a significantly decreased value compared to both CR and FPDs. Concerning digital systems (FPDs), the MGD value of the direct conversion system was significantly higher than the indirect conversion system. No significant difference in MGD value was evident concerning type of monitor diagnosis for either the CR or the FPD digital systems; however, hard copies were used more often in CR. No significant difference in the MGD value was found in relation to monitor resolution. This report suggests ways to lower the doses patients undergoing mammography receive in Japan, and serves as reference data for 4.2 cm compressed breast tissue of 50% composition DRLs. Furthermore, our findings suggest that further optimisation of FPD settings can promote a reduction in the MGD value.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Estimation Of Mean Glandular Dose [7]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Results of a 2011 national questionnaire for investigation of mean glandular dose from mammography in Japan

Asada

Suzuki

Minami³

et al. 2013

J. Radiol. Prot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

References

Yaffe¹,

Bunch²,

Desponds³

et al. 2009

Journal of the ICRU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Necessity of Delivering the Calibration Coefficient of a Dosimeter for Low Energy X-rays Used in Mammography X-ray Units

Matsuo

Tachibana

Akasaka

2008

Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe calibration coefficient currently supplied by the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology AIST is measured with an X-ray unit equipped with a W target/Al filter. We compared the calibration coefficient, which is measured with the X-ray unit equipped with a W target/Al filter and the X-ray unit for mammography. For the calibration coefficient, which is measured at the calibration fields of the X-ray units for mammography, the difference in the calibration coefficient measured with the X-ray unit equipped with a W target/Al filter that assumed a difference in the quality index-value of less than 1.5 was 24.2 at the maximum. In addition, many differences of more than unsureness 5 of the calibration coefficient were accepted. Thus, the correct dosimetry is not being performed for mammography. To improve the precision of dosimetry for mammography, at least, it is desirable to employ the calibration coefficient using the Mo target supplied by AIST. Furthermore, the indication of quality of radiation should be made severe, too. To perform equal dosimetry with a diagnosis domain, it is necessary to supply the calibration coefficient of the other target/filters.

show abstract

Image Quality and Radiation Exposure in Mass Mammography Examinations : A Report from the Survey Group for Institutional Evaluation

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Results of a 2011 national questionnaire for investigation of mean glandular dose from mammography in Japan

Results of a 2011 national questionnaire for investigation of mean glandular dose from mammography in Japan

References

Necessity of Delivering the Calibration Coefficient of a Dosimeter for Low Energy X-rays Used in Mammography X-ray Units

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About