+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

A comparison of conventional mammographic magnification, ultra high magnification and industrial magnification radiography in the radiographic detection of microcalcifications within core biopsies of the breast

A comparison of conventional mammographic magnification, ultra high magnification and industrial magnification radiography in the radiographic detection of microcalcifications within core biopsies of the breast

British Journal of Radiology 70(839): 1099-1103

The objective was to compare conventional magnification radiography (CMR), ultra high magnification radiography (UHMR) and industrial magnification radiography (IMR) in the detection of microcalcifications in breast core biopsies. 440 core biopsies were examined in 1.8-fold CMR and in 7-fold UHMR using a prototype unit. A subgroup of 59 core biopsies were also examined in 10-fold IMR. Number, size, and demarcation of microcalcifications, as well as tissue contrast, were evaluated. Only 67% of the microcalcifications seen with UHMR were detected by CMR and 78% of the core biopsies showing calcifications in UHMR were calcified in CMR. Only 38% and 58% of microcalcifications verified by IMR were identified by CMR and UHMR, respectively. 47% and 63% of the core biopsies showing calcifications in IMR were calcified in CMR and UHMR, respectively. Tissue contrast of IMR was superior to both other modalities. On the other hand, increased cost and time will probably prohibit the use of IMR for specimen radiography in routine clinical examinations. In conclusion, UHMR identifies substantially more core biopsies with microcalcifications than CMR, thus potentially reducing the number of core biopsies needed for histological analysis. IMR allowed the detection of approximately 50%/160% more microcalcifications than UHMR/CMR, thus rendering it the reference mode.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 045047863

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 9536898

DOI: 10.1259/bjr.70.839.9536898

Related references

Detection of microcalcifications in breast specimens by 4-fold DIMA direct magnification radiography compared to 1.5-fold conventional magnification radiography. Rofo 171(4): 302-306, 1999

Role of high magnification specimen radiography in surgical and core biopsies of the breast. British Journal of Radiology 73(875): 1170-1177, 2001

High magnification reflecting microscope objective having a dual magnification mode and zoom magnification capability us patent 4863253 september 5 1989. Official Gazette of the United States Patent & Trademark Office Patents 1106(1): 270, 1989

Film-screen magnification versus electronic magnification and enhancement of digitized contact mammograms in the assessment of subtle microcalcifications. Investigative Radiology 36(12): 726-733, 2001

Artificial bone erosions: detection with magnification radiography versus conventional high-resolution radiography. Radiology 192(3): 861-864, 1994

Intraoral storage phosphor radiography for approximal caries detection and effect of image magnification: Comparison with conventional radiography. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontics 82(1): 94-100, 1996

Longitudinal Magnification in Radiologic Images of Thick Objects: A New Concept in Magnification Radiography. Investigative Radiology 8(4): 275-276, 1973

Magnification factor, position, and true size of an object in stereoscopic magnification radiography. Radiology 142(1): 215-217, 1982

Longitudinal magnification in radiologic images of thick objects: a new concept in magnification radiography. Radiology 114(2): 443-447, 1975

Direct magnification radiography using conventional radiographic equipment. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 135(4): 858-859, 1980

Radiographic magnification versus optical magnification. Radiology 94(1): 196, 1970

A comparison between the electronic magnification (EM) and true magnification (TM) of breast phantom images using a CDMAM phantom. European Journal of Radiology 81(7): 1514-1519, 2012

Short-target-film rotating-grid magnification. Comparison with air-gap magnification. Radiology 104(2): 399-402, 1972

Magnification mammography using 0.1 mm microfocus. Comparison of grid and spot-view magnification. Der Radiologe 27(4): 155-164, 1987

New matrix formulation of spectacle magnification using pupil magnification. I. High myopia corrected with ophthalmic lenses. Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics 15(3): 195-205, 1995