Abstract: Well‐publicized results of the recent Digital Mammography Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) have again shown that there is no clear advantage in mammographic screening of the general population with digital versus film mammography. However, several subgroups—women less than 50 years old, pre‐ or perimenopausal, and denser breasts—did better with digital mammography than with film. Data also suggest that women with the opposite characteristics might do better with film mammography. This article reviews the data of the four studies comparing digital and film mammographic screening. In addition, it describes the technology involved in the two types of mammographic image capture, the advantages and disadvantages of each type of imaging, and the future possibilities opened by digital technique. Because less than one‐tenth of mammography units in use in the United States are digital, the availability of this technology to women undergoing screening and to physicians referring patients to screening sites is very limited. The author suggests that the quality of mammography, rather than the technique used to capture the image, is more important in selecting a mammography facility. For those who have a facility that offers both digital and film mammography, consultation on which type of imaging might be better for an individual woman would be appropriate. Because digital mammography from different manufacturers is based on differing technologies and because data comparing the advantages or disadvantages of these differing types of equipment are not available, it is impossible to recommend which type of digital mammography equipment is best for those undergoing mammography with these types of units.
[1]
R. Hendrick,et al.
Performance comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography in clinical practice.
,
2002,
Medical physics.
[2]
D. Dershaw.
Film or digital mammographic screening?
,
2005,
The New England journal of medicine.
[3]
Per Skaane,et al.
Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--Oslo I study.
,
2003,
Radiology.
[4]
Jay Parikh,et al.
Digital mammography: current capabilities and obstacles.
,
2005,
Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.
[5]
C. D'Orsi,et al.
Diagnostic Performance of Digital Versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening
,
2005,
The New England journal of medicine.
[6]
Martin J Yaffe,et al.
Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience.
,
2003,
Radiology.
[7]
Per Skaane,et al.
Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program--the Oslo II Study.
,
2004,
Radiology.
[8]
J M Lewin,et al.
Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations.
,
2001,
Radiology.
[9]
Mahadevappa Mahesh,et al.
AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: digital mammography: an overview.
,
2004,
Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.