You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither SPIE nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the SPIE website.
6 April 2012Comparison of 2D versus 3D mammography with screening cases: an observer study
Breast cancer is the most common type of non-skin cancer in women. 2D mammography is a screening tool to aid in the
early detection of breast cancer, but has diagnostic limitations of overlapping tissues, especially in dense breasts. 3D
mammography has the potential to improve detection outcomes by increasing specificity, and a new 3D screening tool
with a 3D display for mammography aims to improve performance and efficiency as compared to 2D mammography.
An observer study using human studies collected from was performed to compare traditional 2D mammography with
this new 3D mammography technique. A prior study using a mammography phantom revealed no difference in
calcification detection, but improved mass detection in 2D as compared to 3D. There was a significant decrease in
reading time for masses, calcifications, and normals in 3D compared to 2D, however, as well as more favorable
confidence levels in reading normal cases.
Data for this current study is currently being obtained, and a full report should be available in the next few weeks.
The alert did not successfully save. Please try again later.
James Reza Fernandez, Ruchi Deshpande, Linda Hovanessian-Larsen, Brent Liu, "Comparison of 2D versus 3D mammography with screening cases: an observer study," Proc. SPIE 8318, Medical Imaging 2012: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 831818 (6 April 2012); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.912497