Mammography

About: Mammography is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 20643 publications have been published within this topic receiving 513679 citations.

Advanced algorithmic approaches to medical image segmentation: state-of-the-art application in cardiology, neurology, mammography and pathology

Abstract: Medical imaging is generally recognised as key to the success of better diagnosis and patient care and this book, describing state-of-the-art techniques, is a valuable contribution to the literature. Comprising contributions from authors based in both industry and academia, it focuses primarily on state-of-the-art model based segmentation techniques as applied to CT, MRI, ultrasound, X-ray and mammography. Different applications, such as to cardiac, brain, breast and microscopic cancer cell imaging, are covered and pseudo algorithms are presented. As an overview of state-of-the art techniques, this book will be of particular interest to students and researchers in the fields of medical engineering, image processing, computer graphics, mathematical modelling and data analysis, but it will also be of interest to researchers in the fields of radiology, cardiology, pathology and neurology.

Physician Predictors of Mammographic Accuracy

Abstract: Background: The association between physician experience and the accuracy of screening mammography in community practice is not well studied. We identified characteristics of U.S. physicians associated with the accuracy of screening mammography. Methods: Data were obtained from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium and the American Medical Association Master File. Unadjusted mammography sensitivity and specificity were calculated according to physician characteristics. We modeled mammography sensitivity and specificity by multivariable logistic regression as a function of patient and physician characteristics. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: We studied 209 physicians who interpreted 1220046 screening mammograms from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2000, of which 7143 (5.9 per 1000 mammograms) were associated with breast cancer within 12 months of screening. Each physician interpreted a mean of 6011 screening mammograms (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4998 to 6677), including a mean of 34 (95% CI = 28 to 40) from women diagnosed with breast cancer. The mean sensitivity was 77% (range = 29%-97%), and the mean false-positive rate was 10% (range = 1%-29%). After adjustment for the patient characteristics of those whose mammograms they interpreted, physician characteristics were strongly associated with specificity. Higher specificity was associated with at least 25 years (versus less than 10 years) since receipt of a medical degree (for physicians practicing for 25-29 years, odds ratio [OR] = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.14 to 2.08; P = .006), interpretation of 2500-4000 (versus 481-750) screening mammograms annually (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.59; P= .011) and a high focus on screening mammography compared with diagnostic mammography (OR = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.37 to 1.82; P<.001). Higher overall accuracy was associated with more experience and with a higher focus on screening mammography. Compared with physicians who interpret 481-750 mammograms annually and had a low screening focus, physicians who interpret 2500-4000 mammograms annually and had a high screening focus had approximately 50% fewer false-positive examinations and detected a few less cancers. Conclusion: Raising the annual volume requirements in the Mammography Quality Standards Act might improve the overall quality of screening mammography in the United States.

Measuring the use of mammography: two methods compared.

Abstract: Population studies often estimate mammography use using women's self-reports. In one North Carolina county, we compared self-report surveys with a second method--counting mammograms per population--for 1987 and 1989. Estimates from self-reports (35% in 1987, 55% in 1989) were considerably higher than those from mammogram counts (20% in 1987, 36% in 1989). We then confirmed 66% of self-reports in the past year. Self-reported use is more accurate regarding whether a woman has had a mammogram than when she had it, but self-reports accurately measure change over time.

Mammographic features of the breast and breast cancer risk

Abstract: The authors conducted a case-control study at two Boston, Massachusetts, are hospitals to evaluate the relation of anatomic features of the breast, visible on the xeromammogram, to the risk of breast cancer. The cases were 408 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer and the controls were 1021 women without signs or symptoms of breast disease. The features of the breast assessed were the "parenchymal pattern" as defined by Wolfe (Am J Roentgenol 1976; 126:1132-9), and specific radiologic characteristics which are components of the parenchymal pattern classification. Women whose mammogram showed the P2 or DY parenchymal patterns were at elevated risk compared to women with the N1 pattern. Further, risk increased regularly with increases in the percentage of the breast that showed nodular densities and with increases in the average size and concentration of these densities. Women with extensive homogeneous density were also at elevated risk. These findings were observed only among women aged 20-59 years. In this group, women with nodular densities in 60% or more of the breast appeared to have a five-fold increase in risk compared to women without nodular densities in the breast.