Evaluation of the pectoral muscle in mammography images: The Australian experience

Spuur, Kelly

doi:10.1016/j.ejradi.2008.11.003

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Not all mammograms can achieve the strict level of quality required by the CAR accreditation, especially for some aspects of positioning [3,23]. For example, criteria related to the pectoral muscle are not always attainable even if proper technique was applied, because some women have underdeveloped pectoral muscles, a prominent sternum, various levels of breast mobility or other conditions that make positioning more challenging [3,5,24]. Bentley et al [5] also acknowledge the importance of taking into account the likelihood of attaining each criterion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Image Quality in Daily Practice of Breast Cancer Mammography Screening

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Image Quality in Daily Practice of Breast Cancer Mammography Screening

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Review method Despite published research for the MLO image quality criteria which appears to be widely accepted, 12,[53][54][55] the literature for positioning in general continues to challenge the validity and ability to confirm and quantify positioning criteria. 12,13,54,56 A paucity of validated evidence for the CC criteria remains, 42,57,58 even with the stated importance of the projection. The method of this review has, therefore, been to establish the origin of image quality criteria pertaining to inclusion of posterior breast tissue on the CC.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of mammographic positioning image quality criteria for the craniocaudal projection

Sweeney

Lewis

Hogg

et al. 2017

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detection of breast cancer is reliant on optimal breast positioning and the production of quality images. Two projections, the mediolateral oblique and craniocaudal (CC), are routinely performed. Determination of successful positioning and inclusion of all breast tissue is achieved through meeting stated image quality criteria. For the CC view, current image quality criteria are inconsistent. Absence of reliable anatomical markers, other than the nipple, further contribute to difficulties in assessing the quality of CC views. The aim of this paper was to explore published international quality standards to identify and find the origin of any CC positioning criteria which might provide for quantitative assessment. The pectoralis major (pectoral) muscle was identified as a key posterior anatomical structure to establish optimum breast tissue inclusion on mammographic projections. It forms the first two of the three main CC metrics that are frequently reported (1) visualization of the pectoral muscle, (2) measurement of the posterior nipple line and (3) depiction of retroglandular fat. This literature review explores the origin of the three metrics, and discusses three key publications, spanning 1992 to 1994, on which subsequent image quality standards have been based. The evidence base to support published CC metrics is sometimes not specified and more often, the same set of publications are cited, most often without critical evaluation. To conclude, there remains uncertainty if the metrics explored for the CC view support objective evaluation and reproducibility to confirm optimal breast positioning and quality images.

show abstract

“…Mammography is, therefore, a unique and the most effective method of early detection of breast cancer and, consequently, a method that reduces the mortality of breast cancer (9,10). In screening mammography, the radiographer is responsible for performing a mammogram with a high diagnostic value, while avoiding the pain caused by the compression of breasts (7,11).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mediolateral oblique projection in mammography: use of different angulation for patients with different thorax anatomies

Bedene

Alukić

Žibert

et al. 2019

JHSCI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The literature describes that MLO projection is not done only with angulation of 45° but there is a wider span of angles that can be used. Therefore, we have investigated if the use of alternative angulation in mammographic imaging in relation to specific patient anatomies shows more breast tissue. Methods: MLO mammograms form 491 patients that had a mammography imaging performed at alternative and basic angulation were included in the study. Angulation of 55° was performed when patient had small breasts and convex sternum. The angle of 35° was used for patients with large breasts and concave sternum as well as for patients with shorter thoraxes. Measurements assessed the width of the pectoral muscle, the retromammary part, and the inframammary part of the breast for both projections (alternative and basic). Results: When comparing the angulations of 45° and 55°, all three measured widths were in favor of 55°: the pectoral muscle was on average wider by 4%, the basal part by 1.3%, and the inframammary part by 29%. When comparing angulations of 35° and 45°, at the angulation of 35°, the basal part was wider by 3.3% and inframammary part by 32.4%. There were no differences in the width of the pectoral muscle between mentioned angulations. Conclusion: Based on our results, we recommend the use of a 55° angle as more appropriate for patients with longer thoraxes and small breasts and the use of a 35° angle for those with shorter thoraxes and large breasts.

show abstract

Evaluation of the pectoral muscle in mammography images: The Australian experience

Cited by 14 publications

References 7 publications

Clinical Image Quality in Daily Practice of Breast Cancer Mammography Screening

Clinical Image Quality in Daily Practice of Breast Cancer Mammography Screening

A review of mammographic positioning image quality criteria for the craniocaudal projection

Mediolateral oblique projection in mammography: use of different angulation for patients with different thorax anatomies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About