Xu Hui,Wan Ran,GUO Li,WANG Jian-chao,YUE Bao-rong.Quality control testing and evaluation for digital mammography[J].Chinese Journal of Radiological Medicine and Protection,2010,30(1):89-92
Quality control testing and evaluation for digital mammography
Received:November 17, 2009  
DOI:
KeyWords:Digital mammography  Quality control  Average glandular dose  Image quality
FundProject:
Author NameAffiliationE-mail
Xu Hui National Institute for Radiological Protection, China CDC, Beijing 100088, China  
Wan Ran 北京大学第一医院医学影像科  
GUO Li 北京大学第一医院医学影像科  
WANG Jian-chao National Institute for Radiological Protection, China CDC, Beijing 100088, China  
YUE Bao-rong National Institute for Radiological Protection, China CDC, Beijing 100088, China bryue@163.com 
Hits: 5992
Download times: 2903
Abstract::
      Objective To carry out the quality control testing and evaluation for three digital mammography systems. Methods The performance of three digital mammography systems was assessed by applying methods recommended in the European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis and Chinese specification for testing of quality control in X-ray mammography. The performance of X-ray generator of three digital mammography systems were tested and evaluated. CDMAM 3.4 phantom with four different thickness(30,40,50,60 mm) were exposured in DR, PCM, and CR system, respectively. The average glandular dose (AGD) value was measured and image quality figure (IQF) analysis was performed in each thickness. Results The X-ray machine performance of DR and CR was in accordance with existing standard, however the standard was inappropriate to evaluate part of X-ray machine performance of PCM system. The AGDs for system DR were 1.20, 1.42, 1.75 and 2.20 mGy for 30, 40, 50 and 60 mm PMMA thickness, respectively. The respective AGDs for system PCM and CR were 0.82, 1.19, 1.33, 1.70 mGy and 0.59, 0.88, 1.47, 2.19 mGy. For the same phantom thickness sequence, the IQFs were 21.36, 21.57, 27.25 and 30.58 for system DR, 28.02, 29.10, 35.90, and 41.24 for system PCM, whereas they were 39.78, 39.30, 43.85 and 48.08 for system CR. ConclusionsThe AGDs of all three systems were in accordance with the values recommended in European guideline. The AGD and IQF could provide an effective way for performance assessment and constancy checks for digital mammography systems.
HTML  View Full Text  View/Add Comment  Download reader
Close

Copyright©    Editorial Office of Chinese Journal of Radiological Medicine and Protection    

Beijing ICP No. 05020547 -2

Address: 2 Xinkang Street, Dewai, Beijing 100088, China

Telephone:010-62389620; Email:cjrmp@cjrmp.sina.net

Technical Support:Beijing E-tiller CO.,LTD.

Visitors:9066931  On-line:0

v
Scan QR Code
&et=F27DD3FEE5F2566CAFEA97DA18ED9D19CBDA1DD1B34A250B3E9A126AA3D88A1D62EE8B9FD6027790D14F84966E37CF593D7CA598B5AE8E336E63F22038052E2A&pcid=A9DB1C13C87CE289EA38239A9433C9DC&cid=D4D466D60FDC1A5A&jid=5E4353813E091AB841B02B880782B82C&yid=140ECF96957D60B2&aid=FE3B5670A1617E138B75C1974BC90A40&vid=&iid=CA4FD0336C81A37A&sid=CFAC5CB624A41AFD&eid=08805F9252973BA4&fileno=20100129&flag=1&is_more=0"> var my_pcid="A9DB1C13C87CE289EA38239A9433C9DC"; var my_cid="D4D466D60FDC1A5A"; var my_jid="5E4353813E091AB841B02B880782B82C"; var my_yid="140ECF96957D60B2"; var my_aid="FE3B5670A1617E138B75C1974BC90A40";