Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회지)

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지

Digital Mammography

디지털 유방촬영술

Cho, Na-Ri-Ya;Cha, Joo-Hee;Moon, Woo-Kyung
조나리야;차주희;문우경

  • Published : 2005.04.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Mammography is the best imaging modality for the detection of early breast cancer in asymptomatic women. However, 10-30% of cases are missed with current film-screen mammography. Digital mammography allows for the separate optimization of image acquisition and display. In addition to the obvious data storage, retrieval, and transmission advantages that digital mammography allows, additional advances such as computer-aided diagnosis, tomosynthesis and dual energy mammography are in development. This review will discuss the technology of digital mammography including detectors and displays, the results of clinical trials comparing film-screen and digital mammography, and the use of computer-aided detection. Digital mammography is a promising new technology for breast cancer detection in the Korean women.

유방촬영술은 무증상 여성에서 유방암을 조기 발견하는데 최선의 방법이다. 하지만 기존의 필름-스크린 유방촬영술은 낮은 관용도와 잡음으로 인해 10-30%정도의 유방암을 간과할 수 있다. 디지털 유방촬영술은 영상 획득과 표시가 분리되어 있다. 디지털 유방촬영술은 데이터의 저장, 검색 및 전달 등의 장점이외에도 컴퓨터보조진단, 단층촬영기, 이중에너지 유방촬영술 등도 가능하게 한다. 이 글에서는 최근 유방방사선과학 분야의 최고 관심 영역인 디지털유방촬영술의 도입배경 및 장점, 기술적 원리, 임상연구 결과, 컴퓨터보조진단 및 향후 전망등 에 관해 토론하고자 한다. 디지털 유방촬영술은 우리나라 여성의 유방암 발견에 유망한 신기술이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Smith RA, Saslow DB, Sawyer K, Burke W, Costanza ME, Evans WP 3rd, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin 2003;53:141-169 https://doi.org/10.3322/canjclin.53.3.141
  2. Fisher B, Anderson S, Redmond CK, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, Cronin WM. Reanalysis and results after 12 years of follow-up in a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy with lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1456-1461 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199511303332203
  3. Veronesi D, Saccozzi R, Del Vecchio M, Banfi A, Clemente C, De Lena M, et al. Comparing radical mastectomy with quadrantectomy, axillary dissection, and radiotherapy in patients with small cancers of the breast. N Engl J Med 1981;305:6-11 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198107023050102
  4. Morrow M, Strom E, Bassett LW, Fowble B, Giuliano A, Harris JR, et al. Standards for breast conserving therapy in the management of invasive breast carcinoma. CA Cancer J Clin 2002;52:277-300 https://doi.org/10.3322/canjclin.52.5.277
  5. Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology 2004;230:25-27 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2293031482
  6. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N Engl J Med 1994;331:1493-1499 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199412013312206
  7. 문우경. 유방암의 최신진단법, 대한의사협회지 2003;46:490-496
  8. Shtern F. Digital mammography and related technologies: a perspective from the National Cancer Institute. Radiology 1992;183:629-630 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.183.3.1584908
  9. Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, White D, Finder CA, Taplin SH, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1081-1087 https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/92.13.1081
  10. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Phys Med Biol 1994;39:1629-1638 https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/39/10/008
  11. Yaffe MJ. Detectors for digital mammography. In Pisano ED, Yaffe MJ, Kuzmiak CM. Digital mammography. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Willkins, 2004:15-26
  12. Schulz-Wendtland R, Hermann KP, Lell M, Bohner C, Wenkel E, Imhoff K, et al. Phantom study for the detection of simulated lesions in five different digital and one conventional mammography system. Rofo 2004;176:1127-1132 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-813261
  13. Rong XJ, Shaw CC, Johnston DA, Lemacks MR, Liu X, Whitman GJ, et al. Microcalcification detectability for four mammographic detectors: fiat-panel, CCD, CR, and screen/film. Med Phys 2002;29:2052-2061 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1500768
  14. Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D' Orsi CJ, Isaacs PK, Moss LJ, Karellas A, et al. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screenfilm mammography for cancer detection: results of 4945 paired examinations. Radiology 2001;218:873-880 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.218.3.r01mr29873
  15. Lewin JM, D' Orsi CJ. Hendrick RE, Moss LJ, Isaacs PK, Karellas A, et al. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography for detection of breast cancer. AIR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:671-677 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.179.3.1790671
  16. Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading-Oslo I study. Radiology 2003;229:877-884 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2293021171
  17. Skaane P, Skjennald A. Screen-film mammography versus fullfield digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program-the Oslo II Study. Radiology 2004;232:197-204 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2321031624
  18. Galen B, Staab E, Sullivan DC, Pisano ED. Congressional update: Report from the Biomedical Imaging Program of the National Cancer Institute. American College of Radiology Imaging Network: The digital mammographic imaging screening trial-an update. Acad RadioI 2002;9:374-375 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80382-3
  19. Moon WK. The Use of computer-aided detection system and digital mammography in Seoul National University Hospital. The Second Seoul International Symposium for Computer-Aided Diagnosis Proceedings. 2004;24-25
  20. Fischer D, Baum F, Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Vosshenrich R, et aL Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full-field digital mammography vs screen-film mammography. Eur RadioI 2002;12:2679-2683
  21. Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood S, D' Orsi C, Feig SA, Kopans DB, O' Shaughnessy KF, et al. Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 2000;215:554-562 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ma15554
  22. Freer TW, Ulissey MJ. Screening mammography with computeraided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 2001;220:781-786 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2203001282
  23. 조나리야, 차주희, 문우경. 유방암의 컴퓨터 보조진단. 대한유방검진학회지 2004;1:111-115
  24. Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE, Kopans DB, Castleberry DE, Opsahl-Ong BH, et aL Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology 1997;205:399-406 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.205.2.9356620
  25. Lehtimaki M, Pamilo M, Raulisto L. Diagnostic clinical benefits of digital spot and digital 3D mammography following analysis of screening findings. SPIE Medical Imaging 2003;5029:698-706
  26. Yaffe MJ. Quality control for digital mammography. In Pisano ED, Yaffe MJ, Kuzmiak CM. Digital mammography. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Willkins, 2004:33-42
  27. Pisano ED, Cole EB, Kistner EO, Muller KE, Hemminger BM, Brown ML, et aL Interpretation of digital mammograms: comparison of speed and accuracy of soft-copy versus printed-film display. Radiology 2002;223:483-488 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2232010704
  28. Shtern F, Winfield D. Report of the working group on digital mammography: digital displays and workstation design. Acad Radiol 1999;6:S197-S218 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1076-6332(99)80500-5
  29. Kapur A, Carson PL, Eberhard J, Goodsitt MM, Thomenius K, Lokhandwalla M, et al. Combination of digital mammography with semi-automated 3D breast ultrasound. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2004;3:325-334 https://doi.org/10.1177/153303460400300402
  30. Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M, Shumak RS, Danjoux NM, unesekara A, et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2003;228:842-850 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2283020961
  31. Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V, Larke FJ. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology 2003;229:261-268 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2291021276