Should Breast Imaging Practices Convert to Digital Mammography? A Response from Members of the DMIST Executive Committee

Abstract

HomeRadiologyVol. 245, No. 1 PreviousNext Reviews and CommentaryEditorialsShould Breast Imaging Practices Convert to Digital Mammography? A Response from Members of the DMIST Executive CommitteeEtta D. Pisano, R. Edward Hendrick, Martin Yaffe, Emily F. Conant, Constantine GatsonisEtta D. Pisano, R. Edward Hendrick, Martin Yaffe, Emily F. Conant, Constantine GatsonisAuthor Affiliations1From the Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Engineering, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 4030 Bondurant Hall, CB 7000, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 (E.D.P.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Ill (R.E.H.); Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (M.Y.); Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (E.C.); and Department of Community Health and Applied Mathematics, Brown University, Providence, RI (C.G.). The University of North Carolina has a research agreement with GE Healthcare; R.E.H. has received honoraria from GE Healthcare for continuing medical education lectures. Received February 27, 2007; final version accepted February 28.Address correspondence to E.D.P. (e-mail: [email protected]).Etta D. PisanoR. Edward HendrickMartin YaffeEmily F. ConantConstantine GatsonisPublished Online:Oct 1 2007https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2451070393MoreSectionsFull textPDF ToolsImage ViewerAdd to favoritesCiteTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked In References1 Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Yaffe M, et al. The American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST): objectives and methodology. Radiology 2005; 236: 404–412. Link, Google Scholar2 Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital vs. film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005; 353(17): 1773–1783. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar3 Gur D. Digital mammography: do we need to convert now? Radiology 2007; 245(1): 10–11. Google Scholar4 Lewin JM, D'Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, et al. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179: 671–677. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar5 Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading—Oslo I study. Radiology 2003; 229: 877–884. Link, Google Scholar6 Skaane P, Skjennald A. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program—the Oslo II study. Radiology 2004; 232: 197–204. Link, Google Scholar7 Pisano ED, Cole EB, Hemminger BM, et al. Image processing algorithms for digital mammography: a pictorial essay. RadioGraphics 2000; 20: 1479–1491. Link, Google Scholar8 Pisano ED, Cole EB, Major S, et al. Radiologists' preferences for digital mammographic display. Radiology 2000; 216(3): 820–830. Link, Google Scholar9 Leconte I, Feger C, Galant C, et al. Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 1675–1679. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar10 Dershaw DD. Film or digital mammographic screening? N Engl J Med 2005; 353(17): 1846–1847. Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarArticle HistoryPublished in print: 2007 FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByJournal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized ComputingNihon Nyugan Kenshin Gakkaishi (Journal of Japan Association of Breast Cancer Screening), Vol. 21, No. 3Nihon Nyugan Kenshin Gakkaishi (Journal of Japan Association of Breast Cancer Screening), Vol. 19, No. 1IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, Vol. 3, No. 1IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, Vol. 13, No. 2Physica Medica, Vol. 24, No. 3Recommended Articles Clinical Performance of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography Combined with Tomosynthesis in a Large Screening PopulationRadiology2017Volume: 283Issue: 1pp. 70-76Effect of Digital Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening: A Comparative Study of More than 8 Million Korean WomenRadiology2019Volume: 294Issue: 2pp. 247-255Stand-Alone Machine Learning: More Work Is NeededRadiology2021Volume: 302Issue: 1pp. 105-106Interval Breast Cancer after Digital Breast Tomosynthesis–based Screening: A Glimmer of HopeRadiology2021Volume: 300Issue: 1pp. 77-78Lessons Learned from the Randomized Controlled TOmosynthesis plus SYnthesized MAmmography (TOSYMA) TrialRadiology2022Volume: 0Issue: 0See More RSNA Education Exhibits Non-Contrast-Enhanced Breast MR Screening for Women with Dense BreastsDigital Posters2019Incorporating Peer Learning Into Your Breast Imaging PracticeDigital Posters2020Breast Cancer in Younger Women: Screening and Diagnostic Imaging ExaminationsDigital Posters2018 RSNA Case Collection Lactating BreastRSNA Case Collection2022Neurofibromatosis Type 1RSNA Case Collection2021Breast hemangioma RSNA Case Collection2022 Vol. 245, No. 1 Metrics Altmetric Score PDF download