Multi-site telemammography system: preliminary assessment of technical and operational issues

Our goal was to develop an inexpensive, high-quality, multi-site telemammography system, implemented with low-level data connections that provided a communication link for an “almost real-time” response from a radiologist (central site) to remote “underserved” sites. The remote sites digitize mammographic films using high-resolution, laser digitizers. Images are automatically cropped, compressed (wavelet-based), and encrypted prior to transmission. At the central site images are decrypted, decompressed, unsharp masked, and displayed using automatically determined LUTs. The sites communicate instantly via a “chat box.” Remote sites 1, 2, and 3 are 15, 20, and 90 miles from the central site, respectively, and connected by POTS (sites 1 and 2) and LAN (site 3). Only minimal noticeable difference at compression levels of 50:1 and 75:1 could be identified unless magnified to extreme levels. Two experienced observers rated the LUTs for 200 images as “acceptable” to “excellent.” Average cycle times to digitize, transmit and receive cases (four films each) at 75:1 compression were 5.97, 6.85, and 5.77 min/case from sites 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Unique data-handling schemes significantly decrease the image file size and allow successful transmission in a reliable, timely manner. Over 1000 cases have been transmitted to date. Messaging was found to be easy to use.

[1]  I Moscovice,et al.  Rural radiology: who is producing images and who is reading them? , 1997, The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association.

[2]  Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.  Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? , 2000, The Lancet.

[3]  Daniel B Kopans,et al.  The pattern of breast cancer screening utilization and its consequences , 2002, Cancer.

[4]  J. Elmore,et al.  Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  S L Lou,et al.  Automatic breast region extraction from digital mammograms for PACS and telemammography applications. , 2000, Computerized medical imaging and graphics : the official journal of the Computerized Medical Imaging Society.

[6]  S. Feig.  Current status of screening mammography. , 2002, Obstetrics and gynecology clinics of North America.

[7]  H Irene Hall,et al.  Breast and cervical carcinoma screening practices among women in rural and nonrural areas of the United States, 1998–1999 , 2002, Cancer.

[8]  Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.  Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography , 2001, The Lancet.

[9]  Carol H Lee.  Screening mammography: proven benefit, continued controversy. , 2002, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[10]  T. To,et al.  The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: Breast Cancer Mortality after 11 to 16 Years of Follow-up: A Randomized Screening Trial of Mammography in Women Age 40 to 49 Years , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[11]  T. Perneger,et al.  Misconceptions about efficacy of mammography screening: a public health dilemma , 2001, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[12]  S. Woolf,et al.  Breast Cancer Screening: A Summary of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[13]  D Gur,et al.  Preliminary clinical evaluation of a high-resolution telemammography system. , 1997, Investigative radiology.

[14]  David Gur,et al.  Design considerations for a multisite POTS-based telemammography system , 2002, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[15]  Patients' opinion of mammography screening services: immediate results versus delayed results due to interpretation by two observers. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[16]  L. Tabár,et al.  The impact of organized mammography service screening on breast carcinoma mortality in seven Swedish counties , 2002, Cancer.

[17]  L. Tabár,et al.  Beyond randomized controlled trials , 2001, Cancer.

[18]  Ingvar Andersson,et al.  Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials , 2002, The Lancet.

[19]  S. Duffy,et al.  Comparison of single reading with double reading of mammograms, and change in effectiveness with experience. , 1995, The British journal of radiology.