Monitoring on Dose Index Analyzed in the Mammography

Abstract

This study is tried to determine whether the management of medical radiation is well handled by comparison the guidelines of KFDA(korea food & drug administration) with analysis of dose indicator in mammography. As a method, it is analysed that kVp, exposure time, mAs, compressed breast thickness, average glandular dose and body mass index that were classified in the examination of both breasts by CC(cranio-caudal) and MLO(medio-lateral oblique) with EMR(electronic medical record) and dose report that were sent to the PACS(picture archiving communication system). As a result, in the site inspection according to the age, Compressed breast thickness in CC and MLO were the thickest of 45.6 mm and 49.6 mm in the 50-59 year old respectively. In the overall average compressed breast thickness, CC were 44.2 mm and MLO were 48.9 mm. MLO has more thick by 4.7 mm. In average glandular dose, CC were 1.05 mGy and MLO were 1.14 mGy. MLO has higher by 0.09 mGy than CC. As the compressed breast thickness increases 10mm, CC and MLO increases 0.15 mGy and 0.17 mGy respectively. When it was compared with the average glandular dose of 1.16 mGy per 1 film presented by KFDA, CC was showed 1.05 mGy. However, the 60 mm or more was found to exceed a 1.30 mGy. Also, As the compressed breast thickness was higher, body mass index showed high score. And in the case of 25 or more in the obese body index according to body mass index, it was showed obesity in case of the compressed breast thickness was more than 50mm.

Development of breast phantoms using a 3D printer and glandular dose evaluation

“…This issue is exacerbated by the fact that mammography requires multiple imaging from different angles. 12 , 13 , 14 Therefore, it is important to quantitatively assess the radiation dose received by the breast during a screening mammogram.…”

“…However, this technique involves the use of a high tube current at low voltages, which increases the risk of radiation exposure. This issue is exacerbated by the fact that mammography requires multiple imaging from different angles 12–14 . Therefore, it is important to quantitatively assess the radiation dose received by the breast during a screening mammogram.…”