Volume 15 Supplement 1

British Society of Breast Radiology Annual Scientific Meeting 2013

Open Access

PB.13: Comparison between analogue and digital mammography: a reader's perspective

  • H Gay1,
  • R Pietrosanu1,
  • S George1,
  • D Tzias1,
  • R Mehta1,
  • C Patel1,
  • S Heller1 and
  • L Wilkinson1
Breast Cancer Research201315(Suppl 1):P13

https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr3513

Published: 8 November 2013

Introduction

In comparison with analogue film, digital mammography provides images with more contrast and allows image manipulation. This study compares features identified on digital and analogue mammograms.

Methods

During the transition to digital mammography between June and August 2011, women who had received analogue screening mammography and required further views at assessment had repeat digital images. Eight readers reviewed digital and analogue images separately, marking all features that caught their attention on a pro forma. Readers commented on breast density and characterised all features using BiRads descriptors.

Results

Twenty-three women were recalled for soft tissue lesions (six malignancies) and 13 for calcifications (one malignancy). Fifty analogue/digital single-view mammogram pairs were obtained, 11 included histologically malignant abnormalities. Breast density scores were lower on digital than analogue (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the descriptions of calcifications. More inconsequential soft tissue features were described on analogue. Soft tissue features tended to be scored as less conspicuous on analogue than digital images. There was no significant difference in the description of 5/6 soft tissue cancers, but one cancer was seen by five readers on analogue, and only two on digital mammogram. See Table 1.
Table 1

Aggregate features identified (number of times features were marked)

 

Analogue

Digital

Soft tissue

398

319

Calcifications

178

173

Conclusion

This study showed that readers reported breasts as less dense and identified fewer distracting soft tissue lesions on digital mammography but there was no difference in the reporting of calcifications. One of six cancers was under-reported on digital mammography.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
St George's Hospital NHS Trust

Copyright

© Gay et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Advertisement