Volume 4 Supplement 1

Symposium Mammographicum 2002

Open Access

Evaluation of three different resolution workstations for reporting computerised radiography mammographic images

  • ERE Denton1,
  • G Hurst1,
  • G Wivell1 and
  • J Pilling1
Breast Cancer Research20024(Suppl 1):25

https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr481

Published: 1 July 2002

Using Fuji computerised radiography and a General Electric PACS our unit now reports soft copy mammography images. These are available for reporting on three monitors, a Pathspeed Diagnostic 2A workstation with two monitors each with 1728 × 2304 pixel resolution, a Pathspeed Diagnostic 2B with two monitors each with 1200 × 1600 pixel resolution and an image review workstation (IRW), which constitutes a Dell PC with a 17" flat panel LCD screen with 1024 × 768 pixel resolution. Mammography reporting has traditionally been felt to require the best possible resolution. This study has been designed to show whether or not this is necessary.

We have evaluated standard mammography phantom images (TORMAS and TORMAM) and a set of 50 mammograms with known calcification to determine the resolution required for reporting CR mammography. This has implications for other units interested in computerised radiography as the costs of the three reporting workstations range from £1,000 to £41,000.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Breast Imaging Department, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust

Copyright

© BioMed Central 2002

Advertisement