Performance measurements of mammographic systems

Abstract

Performance measurements of 30 mammographic installations were carried out in order to see the current level of image quality and breast doses.The half of the systems tested in this survey indicated automatic exposure control and beam collimation problems. Film processing and dark room conditions were not optimum for the majority of the installations. Image quality phantoms were exposed by the user and team of the survey at each visited center. Lower breast doses were obtained at equal image qualities for the radiographs of the team indicating the importance of adequate handling of some exposure parameters. Corrective actions were suggested to each installation and necessary guidance was advised for the implementation of routine quality control activities.

Diagnostic reference levels for digital mammography in New South Wales

“…The variations in dose values represented in the long tailed distribution in Figure are similar to the distribution reported in an earlier large UK study . In addition, the level of difference between the highest and the lowest dose units/centres reported here are not dissimilar from that expressed in other countries with other work demonstrating marginally less, comparable or higher variations . It should be acknowledged that the higher doses in this study as discussed above, mainly relate to CR units, which at the time of writing have generally now been replaced and the next round of DRL surveys should reflect this.…”

“…32 In addition, the level of difference between the highest and the lowest dose units/centres reported here are not dissimilar from that expressed in other countries with other work demonstrating marginally less, 20,28,33 comparable 18,19 or higher variations. 34 It should be acknowledged that the higher doses in this study as discussed above, mainly relate to CR units, which at the time of writing have generally now been replaced and the next round of DRL surveys should reflect this. Overall, when taking into consideration the reported compressed breast thicknesses by other international studies, it was found that our reported dose medians and percentiles were less than most of patient studies reviewed by Suleiman et al in 2014.…”

Performance tests for mammographic film-screen combinations: use of absolute techniques

“…Film and screens were selected according to the results of a previous survey study reporting the types of F-S combinations used in many radiology departments (15). Thirty combinations of five different films with six different types of screens were selected for this study (Table 1).…”

Diagnostic Reference Levels in Mammography in the Asian Context

“…A study done in Iran [36] shows the 75 𝑡ℎ percentile as 0.88 and 1.11 mGy for CC and MLO views, respectively. A study done in Turkey [28]reported 1.3 and 1.8 mGy for CC and MLO views, respectively. A study done in China [37] reported that the mean MGD was about 1.6 mGy and the range of the MGD was from 0.39-5.01 mGy.…”

“…This may be due to the variation of technical parameters of different manufacturers. In a Taiwanese study using the ACR phantom, the 75 𝑡ℎ percentile was obtained as 1.87mGy [27], but a Turkish study [28]with the same phantom followed the IAEA protocol with Dance et al [26] conversion factors produced the 75 𝑡ℎ percentile as 2.0 mGy. In the Indian study [25]conducted with an in-house built phantom similar to ACR PMMA, breast entrance exposure (BEE) was measured by placing a thermoluminescence dosimeter (TLD) within the engraved slot of the phantom.…”