HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zuley, M. L. Articles by Destounis, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zuley, M. L. Articles by Destounis, S. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Full-Field Digital Mammography on LCD Versus CRT Monitors

¹ Department of Radiology, The Elizabeth Wende Breast Clinic, 170 Sawgrass Dr., Rochester, NY 14620.
² Department of Radiology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY.
³ Ovation Research Group, Highland Park, IL.
⁴ Digital Radiography Systems Division, Analogic Corporation, Peabody, MA.
⁵ UCD School of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.
⁶ Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH.

OBJECTIVE. Our purpose was to determine if the display of full-field digital mammograms on a 5-megapixel liquid crystal display (LCD) monitor is at least equivalent to the display of the same on a 5-megapixel cathode ray tube (CRT) monitor.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Five radiologists evaluated normal anatomy and features of 61 abnormalities in 48 full-field digital mammograms. A 9-point Likert scale was used to compare images on two identical soft-copy review workstations, one equipped with two 5-megapixel CRTs and the other with two 5-megapixel LCDs. Outcomes were evaluated using a random-effects analysis of variance model. Means and SEs were reported. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals and p values were calculated.

RESULTS. The two systems were equivalent for most features. The LCDs were rated better for the sharpness of mass margins (p = 0.011) and mass conspicuity (p = 0.050). For calcium features, the LCDs were rated better than the CRTs for lesion conspicuity (p = 0.010) and number of calcifications (p = 0.043). For architectural distortions, there was no statistically significant difference between the monitors in any of the features evaluated. For display characteristics, the LCDs were better for luminance (p = 0.021). The CRTs were significantly better for image noise (p = 0.001). In the overall ratings, there was no statistically significant difference between the two displays.

CONCLUSION. The 5-megapixel monochrome active-matrix LCD is equivalent to and in some respects better than the 5-megapixel CRT display for full-field digital mammograms over a range of normal and abnormal findings.

Keywords: breast • breast cancer • mammography • PACS

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. B. Krug, H. Stutzer, R. Schroder, J. Boecker, J. Poggenborg, and K. Lackner Image Quality of Digital Direct Flat-Panel Mammography Versus an Analog Screen-Film Technique Using a Low-Contrast Phantom Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2008; 191(3): W80 - W88. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]