Cargando…

Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography

The objectives of this study were to document imaging physics parameters associated with mammography physics surveys, and investigate how the choice of tube potential affects average glandular dose (AGD) and x‐ray exposure time. Data from 60 mammography units were obtained pertaining to representati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: LaVoy, Thomas R., Huda, Walter, Ogden, Kent M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2002
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12132948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v3i3.2572
_version_ 1783285386887299072
author LaVoy, Thomas R.
Huda, Walter
Ogden, Kent M.
author_facet LaVoy, Thomas R.
Huda, Walter
Ogden, Kent M.
author_sort LaVoy, Thomas R.
collection PubMed
description The objectives of this study were to document imaging physics parameters associated with mammography physics surveys, and investigate how the choice of tube potential affects average glandular dose (AGD) and x‐ray exposure time. Data from 60 mammography units were obtained pertaining to representative values of mAs, exposure time, half value layer, AGD and film density when acquiring phantom images. The survey of clinical systems showed that for a normal sized breast as represented by the mammography accreditation phantom, 60% of these units were operated at 25 kVp, and 33% at 26 kVp. Median exposure times were 1.14 s at 25 kVp and 0.73 s at 26 kVp. The median AGD was 1.62 mGy at 25 kVp and 1.51 mGy at 26 kVp. As expected, the choice of x‐ray tube potential did not significantly affect the median film density value of 1.5. Five clinical systems, all from different vendors, had measurements performed of the AGD and x‐ray exposure time as a function of x‐ray tube potential at a constant film density. For a typical clinical x‐ray unit, increasing the x‐ray tube potential from 25 to 28 kVp reduced the exposure time by 50%, and reduced the AGD by 26%. PACS number(s): 87.57.–s, 87.59.Ek, 87.62.+n
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5724594
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2002
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57245942018-04-02 Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography LaVoy, Thomas R. Huda, Walter Ogden, Kent M. J Appl Clin Med Phys Medical Imaging The objectives of this study were to document imaging physics parameters associated with mammography physics surveys, and investigate how the choice of tube potential affects average glandular dose (AGD) and x‐ray exposure time. Data from 60 mammography units were obtained pertaining to representative values of mAs, exposure time, half value layer, AGD and film density when acquiring phantom images. The survey of clinical systems showed that for a normal sized breast as represented by the mammography accreditation phantom, 60% of these units were operated at 25 kVp, and 33% at 26 kVp. Median exposure times were 1.14 s at 25 kVp and 0.73 s at 26 kVp. The median AGD was 1.62 mGy at 25 kVp and 1.51 mGy at 26 kVp. As expected, the choice of x‐ray tube potential did not significantly affect the median film density value of 1.5. Five clinical systems, all from different vendors, had measurements performed of the AGD and x‐ray exposure time as a function of x‐ray tube potential at a constant film density. For a typical clinical x‐ray unit, increasing the x‐ray tube potential from 25 to 28 kVp reduced the exposure time by 50%, and reduced the AGD by 26%. PACS number(s): 87.57.–s, 87.59.Ek, 87.62.+n John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2002-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5724594/ /pubmed/12132948 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v3i3.2572 Text en © 2002 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Medical Imaging
LaVoy, Thomas R.
Huda, Walter
Ogden, Kent M.
Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography
title Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography
title_full Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography
title_fullStr Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography
title_full_unstemmed Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography
title_short Radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography
title_sort radiographic techniques in screen‐film mammography
topic Medical Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12132948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v3i3.2572
work_keys_str_mv AT lavoythomasr radiographictechniquesinscreenfilmmammography
AT hudawalter radiographictechniquesinscreenfilmmammography
AT ogdenkentm radiographictechniquesinscreenfilmmammography