Full-field digital mammography compared to screen film mammography in the prevalent round of a population-based screening programme: the Vestfold County Study

Full-field digital mammography compared to screen film mammography in the prevalent round of a population-based screening programme: the Vestfold County Study

The purpose of the study was to compare the performance of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) with soft-copy reading to screen film mammography (SFM) used during the first prevalent 2-year round of population-based screening. A total of 18,239 women aged 50–69 years were screened with FFDM as par...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European radiology 2008, Vol.18 (1), p.183-191
Hauptverfasser: Vigeland, Einar, Klaasen, Herman, Klingen, Tor Audun, Hofvind, Solveig, Skaane, Per
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Aged
Breast
Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging
Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology
Chi-Square Distribution
Diagnostic Radiology
Female
Humans
Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted
Imaging
Internal Medicine
Interventional Radiology
Mammography - methods
Mass Screening
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Neuroradiology
Norway - epidemiology
Predictive Value of Tests
Prevalence
Radiology
Ultrasound
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The purpose of the study was to compare the performance of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) with soft-copy reading to screen film mammography (SFM) used during the first prevalent 2-year round of population-based screening. A total of 18,239 women aged 50–69 years were screened with FFDM as part of the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Programme (NBCSP). Process indicators were compared to data from 324,763 women screened with SFM using the common national database of the NBCSP. The cancer detection rates were 0.77% (140/18,239) for FFDM and 0.65% (2,105/324,763) for SFM (p = 0.058). For ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) alone, the results were: FFDM 0.21% (38/18,239) compared to SFM 0.11% (343/324,763) (p 
ISSN:0938-7994
1432-1084
DOI:10.1007/s00330-007-0730-y