In mammography it is most important to consistently produce high-contrast, high resolution images at the lowest radiation dose consistently with high image quality. Today it is possible to obtain mammograms with higher image quality that require significantly lower radiation dose compared to mammograms dating back to the 1970's and early 1980's. Some of the technical developments due to x-ray equipment and image receptors and quality control programs that have let to todays high quality mammographic images are discussed in this article.
References
1.
HausA. G.: Physical principles and radiation dose in mammography. Breast Carcinoma Current Diagnosis and Treatment, Masson Publishing pp 99–114. Eds. FeigS. A. and McLellandR.. NY (1983).
2.
NCRP Report 85 Mammography-A users's guide. National Council of Radiation Protection and Measurements. Bethesda, MD (1986).
3.
RothenbergL. N., HausA. G.: Physicists in mammography-A historical perspective. Medical Physics22 (11) pp 1923–1934, November(1995).
4.
Recommended Specifications for New Mammography Equipment: Screen-Film X-ray Systems, Image Receptors, and Film Processors. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA (1995).
5.
BarnesG. T.: Mammography imaging physics: x-ray equipment considerations. Syllabus, Categorical Course in Diagnostic Radiology Physics: Physicial Aspects of Breast Imaging-Current and Future Considerations, Radiological Society of North America pp 41–57, Eds. HausA. G. and YaffeM. J., Oak Brook, IL (1999).
6.
HausA. G.: Mammography imaging physics: screen-film processing and viewing condition considerations. In ref 5 pp 59–77.
7.
American College of Radiology (ACR) Mammography Quality Control Manual for Radiologists, Medical Physicists, and Technologists, American College of Radiology, Reston VA (1999).
8.
GabbayE.: Mammography x-ray source, Syllabus, A Categorical in Physics: Technical Aspects of Breast Imaging, Radiological Society of North America pp 47–62, Eds. HausA. G. and YaffeM. J., Oak Brook, IL (1994).
9.
HausA. G., MetzC. E., ChilesJ. T., RossmanK.: The effects of x-ray spectra from molybdenum and tungsten target tubes on image quality in mammography. Radiology pp 705–709 (1976).
10.
FewellT. R., ShuppingR. E.: Handbook of Mammographic X-ray Spectra. HEW Publication (FDA) (1979).
11.
HausA. G.: Dedicated mammographic x-ray equipment, screen-film processing systems and viewing conditions in mammography. Seminars in Breast Disease Vol 2 No 1, pp 30–54 March (1999).
12.
HendrickR. E., BurnsE. A.: Optimizing mammographic techniques. In ref 5 pp79–89.
13.
HausA. G., DoiK., ChilesJ. T., RossmannK., MintzerR. A.: The Effect of geometric and recording system unshapness in mammography, Invest Radiology10 No 1, pp 43–52 (1975).
14.
HausA. G., CowartR. W., DoddG. D., BencomoJ.: A method of evaluation and minimizing geometric unsharpness for mammographic x-ray units. Radiology128 pp 775–778 (1978).
15.
Kimme-SmithC, BassettL. W., GoldR. H.: Focal spot measurements with pin hold and slit for microfocus mammography units. Medical Physics15 pp 293–298 (1988).
16.
BarnesG. T., BrezovichI. A.: The intensify of scattered radiation in mammography. Radiology126 pp 243–247 (1978).
17.
ChanH. P., FrankP. H., DoiK.: Development of ultra-high strip density (UHSD) grids: A new anti-scatter technique for mammography. Radiology154 pp 807–815 (1985).
18.
SicklesE. A., WeberN.: High-contrast mammography with moving grid: Assessment of clinical utilityAm. J. Roentgenol146 pp 1137–1139, (1986).
19.
LaFranceR. L., GelskeyD. E., BarnesG. T.: A circuit modification that improves mammographic phototimer performance. Radiology166 pp 773–776, (1988).
WayrynenR. E.: Fundamental aspects of mammographic receptors film process. Reduced Dose Mammography, Masson Publishing pp 521–528, Eds. LoganW. W., MuntzE. P., New York, NY, (1979).
22.
MuntzE. P., WelkowskyM., KaegiE., MorsellL, WilkinsonE., JacobsonG.: Optimization of electrostatic imaging systems for minimum patient dose or minimum exposure in mammography. Radiology127 pp 517 (1978).
23.
Kimme-SmithC., RothchildP. A., BassettL. W., GoldR. H., MolerC.: Mammographic film processor temperature, development time, and chemistry: Effect on dose, contrast and noise. Am. J. Roentgenol152 pp 34–40 (1989).
HausA. G., JaskulskiS.M: The Basics of Film Processing Medical Imaging. Medical Physics Publishing, Madison, WI (1997).
26.
Kimme-SmithC., HausA. G., DeBruhlN., BassettL. W., Effects of ambient light and viewbox luminance on the detection of calcifications in mammography. Am. J. Roentgenol168 pp 775–778 (1997).
27.
HausA. G., GrayJ. E., DalyT. R.: Evaluation of mammographic viewbox luminance, illuminance, and color. Medical Physics20 pp 819–821 (1993).
28.
KarellasA, HarrisL. J., D'OrsiC. J.: Small field digital Mammography with a 2048 × 2048 pixel charge coupled device. Radiology177 pp 288 (1990).
29.
YaffeM. J.: Digital mammography. In Ref 5 pp 229–238.
30.
HendrickR. E., ParkerS. H.: Stereotactic imaging. In Ref 8 pp 263–274.
31.
HausA. G., YaffeM. J.: Screen-film and digital mammographyimage quality and radiation dose considerations.: Radiologic Clinics of North America Vol 38 No 4 pp 871–898 (2000).
32.
PisanoE. P.: Current clinical status of full-field digital Mammography. In Ref 5 pp 239–247.
