Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/11271898
Switch to
Predicate | Object |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
lifeskim:mentions |
umls-concept:C0003103,
umls-concept:C0024671,
umls-concept:C0035647,
umls-concept:C0178602,
umls-concept:C0180860,
umls-concept:C0456603,
umls-concept:C0520510,
umls-concept:C0581406,
umls-concept:C1510992,
umls-concept:C1522664,
umls-concept:C1546637,
umls-concept:C1550638,
umls-concept:C1561954,
umls-concept:C1704449,
umls-concept:C1704684,
umls-concept:C1979874,
umls-concept:C2603343
|
pubmed:issue |
874
|
pubmed:dateCreated |
2001-2-22
|
pubmed:abstractText |
The comparative performance of mammographic X-ray systems that use different anode/filter combinations has been assessed for screen-film and digital imaging. Monte Carlo techniques have been used to calculate average glandular dose as well as contrast and signal-to-noise ratio for imaging two test details. Five anode/filter combinations have been studied to establish the potential for dose saving or image quality improvement. For screen-film mammography, it was found that little benefit is gained by changing from a standard 28 kV molybdenum/molybdenum spectrum for breasts up to 6 cm thick. For thicker breasts, where the tube potential for the standard technique might be increased, 20% improvement in contrast can be achieved without dose penalty using molybdenum/rhodium or rhodium/rhodium spectra, whereas dose savings of more than 50% can be attained whilst maintaining contrast using tungsten/rhodium or rhodium/aluminium spectra. In digital mammography, a molybdenum/molybdenum spectrum delivers the lowest dose for a 2 cm breast, but gives the highest dose for thicker breasts. Tungsten/rhodium or rhodium/aluminium spectra provide the lowest doses at greater thicknesses. It is concluded that for screen-film mammography, molybdenum/molybdenum is the spectrum of choice for all but the thickest or most glandular breasts. In digital mammography, an alternative spectrum is preferable for breasts thicker than 2 cm.
|
pubmed:language |
eng
|
pubmed:journal | |
pubmed:citationSubset |
AIM
|
pubmed:chemical | |
pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
pubmed:month |
Oct
|
pubmed:issn |
0007-1285
|
pubmed:author | |
pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
pubmed:volume |
73
|
pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
pubmed:pagination |
1056-67
|
pubmed:dateRevised |
2006-11-15
|
pubmed:meshHeading |
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Aluminum,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Breast Diseases,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Electrodes,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Female,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Humans,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Mammography,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Molybdenum,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Monte Carlo Method,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Phantoms, Imaging,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Radiation Dosage,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Radiation Protection,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Rhodium,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Sensitivity and Specificity,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Spectrum Analysis,
pubmed-meshheading:11271898-Tungsten
|
pubmed:year |
2000
|
pubmed:articleTitle |
Influence of anode/filter material and tube potential on contrast, signal-to-noise ratio and average absorbed dose in mammography: a Monte Carlo study.
|
pubmed:affiliation |
Joint Department of Physics, The Royal Marsden NHS Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, Fulham Road, London SW3 6JJ, UK.
|
pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
|