Digital Mammography: Do We Need to Convert Now?

Abstract

HomeRadiologyVol. 245, No. 1 PreviousNext Reviews and CommentaryEditorialsDigital Mammography: Do We Need to Convert Now?David GurDavid GurAuthor Affiliations1From the Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, Imaging Research, 3362 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213. Received December 6, 2006; revision requested January 3, 2007; revision received January 8; final version accepted February 1.Address correspondence to the author (e-mail: [email protected]).David GurPublished Online:Oct 1 2007https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2451062078MoreSectionsFull textPDF ToolsImage ViewerAdd to favoritesCiteTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked In References1 Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005; 353(17): 1773–1783. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar2 Yaffe MJ, Barnes GT, Orton CG. Point/counterpoint: film mammography for breast cancer screening in younger women is no longer appropriate because of the demonstrated superiority of digital mammography for this age group. Med Phys 2006; 33(11): 3979–3982. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar3 Skaane P, Balleyguier C, Diekmann F, et al. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading—observer performance study. Radiology 2005; 237(1): 37–44. Link, Google Scholar4 Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, et al. Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full-field digital mammography vs screen-film mammography. Eur Radiol 2002; 12(11): 2679–2683. Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarArticle HistoryPublished in print: 2007 FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByJournal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized ComputingEuropean Radiology, Vol. 21, No. 1Journal de Radiologie, Vol. 90, No. 2IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, Vol. 13, No. 2Academic Radiology, Vol. 15, No. 11Recommended Articles Clinical Performance of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography Combined with Tomosynthesis in a Large Screening PopulationRadiology2017Volume: 283Issue: 1pp. 70-76Does Reader Performance with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Vary according to Experience with Two-dimensional Mammography?Radiology2017Volume: 283Issue: 2pp. 371-380Implementation of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography in a Population-based Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening ProgramRadiology2016Volume: 281Issue: 3pp. 730-736Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening for Breast Cancer: It Is Cost-effective!Radiology2020Volume: 297Issue: 1pp. 49-50Breast Cancer Conspicuity on Simultaneously Acquired Digital Mammographic Images versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis ImagesRadiology2019Volume: 292Issue: 1pp. 69-76See More RSNA Education Exhibits Breast Density Included in the Modern Rules of Mammographic ScreeningDigital Posters2019Encouraging Mammography Screening: Strategies for Designing a Culturally and Linguistically Targeted Breast Cancer Educational Program for a Multicultural PopulationDigital Posters2018Integrating Digital Breast Tomosynthesis into a Hybrid Academic-Private PracticeDigital Posters2019 RSNA Case Collection Primary breast amyloidosisRSNA Case Collection2020Invasive ductal carcinoma as developing asymmetryRSNA Case Collection2021Lactating BreastRSNA Case Collection2022 Vol. 245, No. 1 Metrics Downloaded 143 times Altmetric Score PDF download