AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kimme-Smith, C.
Right arrow Articles by Gornbein, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kimme-Smith, C.
Right arrow Articles by Gornbein, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 154, 713-719, Copyright © 1990 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

New mammography screen/film combinations: imaging characteristics and radiation dose

C Kimme-Smith, LW Bassett, RH Gold, J Zheutlin and JA Gornbein
Iris Cantor Center for Breast Imaging, UCLA School of Medicine 90024.

Five types of film (Kodak OM, Kodak OM-SO177, Konica CM, Dupont Microvision, and Fuji MiMa) exposed in combination with seven different intensifying screens (Min R, Min R Medium, Siemens Orthox MA, Kyokka HR Mammo Fine, Agfa Gevaert Detail S (old and new), and Konica Monarch) were processed for either 90 sec (at 33.3 degrees C) or 3 min (at 35.0 degrees C). The films imaged a Computerized Imaging Reference System phantom with additional detail test objects placed on its surface to produce four groups of objects with which to evaluate resolution and contrast. For objects that tested resolution, the Kyokka HR Mammo Fine (Fuji) screen was statistically significantly superior; for objects that tested contrast, the Konica Monarch screen was statistically significantly superior. Extended processing did not affect Dupont and Kodak OM film as much as it affected the other films. It did affect contrast for the other films tested. The mean glandular doses from gridless exposures ranged from 32 to 80 mrad (0.32-0.80 mGy) over all film/screen/processing combinations for a 4.5-cm-thick test object. Several new film/screen combinations can provide images superior to the Kodak Min R/OM combination at a reduced radiation dose. The Kyokka HR Mammo Fine (Fuji) screen was found statistically superior in radiographic resolution of mammographic test objects and the Konica Monarch screen was found to be superior in defining contrast.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
A D Dimakopoulou, I A Tsalafoutas, E K Georgiou, and E N Yakoumakis
Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography
Br. J. Radiol., February 1, 2006; 79(938): 123 - 129.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
I A Tsalafoutas, A D Dimakopoulou, E D Koulentianos, A N Serefoglou, and E N Yakoumakis
Variation of the sensitometric characteristics of seven mammographic films with processing conditions
Br. J. Radiol., August 1, 2004; 77(920): 666 - 671.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.