Volume 4 Supplement 1

Symposium Mammographicum 2002

Open Access

To mag or not mag: that was the question?

  • S Laybourne1,
  • J Austin1,
  • G Brown1 and
  • J MacDonald1
Breast Cancer Research20024(Suppl 1):59

https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr518

Published: 1 July 2002

Aims

  1. (1)

    To compare digital magnification views with zoomed images on the Senographe 2000D workstation. (2) To compare the number of digital magnification views to analogue magnification over a period of 1 year.

     

Method

Over a 1-year period an assessment was made as to whether a radiologist could determine a difference between zoomed images and magnified digital images. In addition, a comparison was made with the number of requests for magnification views in the first year of full field digital mammography (FFDM) compared with the same period prior to installation of FFDM.

Results

Radiologists could not see a difference when comparing zoomed or magnified images. It was noted that in the 1-year period following FFDM installation requests for magnification views had fallen by 80%.

Conclusion

We conclude that the introduction of digital mammography has reduced patient dose, where additional magnified views would have been required. We believe this has benefited the service by reducing patient anxiety and waiting list through reduced mammographic recalls for additional views.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Radiology, The Royal Marsden NHS Trust

Copyright

© BioMed Central 2002

Advertisement