Abstract
The object of this study was to compare of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) workstation and conventional picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) in image quality and diagnostic performance. We assembled 80 masses and 80 microcalcifications. Images were displayed on workstation, 5M, and 3M PACS monitors. The image quality for mammograms on workstation was significantly better than that for mammograms on PACS monitors. The sensitivity and NPV for microcalcifications on workstation were higher than those on PACS monitors. The conventional PACS cannot substitute for a FFDM workstation for mammographic evaluation.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
