Iranian Journal of Radiology

Published by: Kowsar

Glandular Dose of Full Field Digital Mammography in Korean Women Based on Specific Factors

Seung Hee Han 1 , Bong Joo Kang 1 , * , Ji Eun Baek 1 , Hyun Sil Lee 1 and Sung Hun Kim 1
Authors Information
1 Department of Radiology, Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, the Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea
Article information
  • Iranian Journal of Radiology: October 2018, 15 (4); e62958
  • Published Online: August 1, 2018
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: October 17, 2017
  • Revised: June 27, 2018
  • Accepted: July 10, 2018
  • DOI: 10.5812/iranjradiol.62958

To Cite: Han S H, Kang B J, Baek J E, Lee H S, Kim S H. et al. Glandular Dose of Full Field Digital Mammography in Korean Women Based on Specific Factors, Iran J Radiol. 2018 ; 15(4):e62958. doi: 10.5812/iranjradiol.62958.

Abstract
Copyright © 2018, Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Patients and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
Footnotes
References
  • 1. Independent U. K. Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380(9855):1778-86. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61611-0. [PubMed: 23117178].
  • 2. Yaffe MJ, Mainprize JG. Risk of radiation-induced breast cancer from mammographic screening. Radiology. 2011;258(1):98-105. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10100655. [PubMed: 21081671].
  • 3. Hendrick RE. Radiation doses and cancer risks from breast imaging studies. Radiology. 2010;257(1):246-53. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10100570. [PubMed: 20736332].
  • 4. O'Connor MK, Li H, Rhodes DJ, Hruska CB, Clancy CB, Vetter RJ. Comparison of radiation exposure and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from mammography and molecular imaging of the breast. Med Phys. 2010;37(12):6187-98. doi: 10.1118/1.3512759. [PubMed: 21302775]. [PubMed Central: PMC2997811].
  • 5. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(2-4):1-332. doi: 10.1016/j.icrp.2007.10.003. [PubMed: 18082557].
  • 6. Butt WP, Walkowiak J. The Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) regulations (IRME) 2000--radiological considerations. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002;84(6):781-2. [PubMed: 12211664].
  • 7. Kase KR. Radiation protection principles of NCRP. Health Phys. 2004;87(3):251-7. [PubMed: 15303061].
  • 8. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD, Hall EJ, Berdon WE. Estimates of the cancer risks from pediatric CT radiation are not merely theoretical: comment on "point/counterpoint: in x-ray computed tomography, technique factors should be selected appropriate to patient size. against the proposition". Med Phys. 2001;28(11):2387-8. doi: 10.1118/1.1415074. [PubMed: 11764047].
  • 9. Linton OW, Mettler FA Jr, National Council on Radiation P; Measurements. National conference on dose reduction in CT, with an emphasis on pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(2):321-9. doi: 10.2214/ajr.181.2.1810321. [PubMed: 12876005].
  • 10. Nicol RM, Wayte SC, Bridges AJ, Koller CJ. Experiences of using a commercial dose management system (GE DoseWatch) for CT examinations. Br J Radiol. 2016;89(1057):20150617. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20150617. [PubMed: 26539632].
  • 11. Baek JE, Kang BJ, Kim SH, Lee HS. Radiation dose affected by mammographic composition and breast size: first application of a radiation dose management system for full-field digital mammography in Korean women. World J Surg Oncol. 2017;15(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s12957-017-1107-6. [PubMed: 28153022]. [PubMed Central: PMC5290600].
  • 12. Preston DL, Pierce DA, Shimizu Y, Cullings HM, Fujita S, Funamoto S, et al. Effect of recent changes in atomic bomb survivor dosimetry on cancer mortality risk estimates. Radiat Res. 2004;162(4):377-89. [PubMed: 15447045].
  • 13. Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, Funamoto S, Nishi N, Soda M, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiat Res. 2007;168(1):1-64. doi: 10.1667/RR0763.1. [PubMed: 17722996].
  • 14. Preston DL, Shimizu Y, Pierce DA, Suyama A, Mabuchi K. Studies of mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 13: solid cancer and noncancer disease mortality: 1950-1997. 2003. Radiat Res. 2012;178(2):AV146-72. [PubMed: 22870966].
  • 15. National Research Council. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. 7. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press; 2006.
  • 16. Dance DR, Young KC, van Engen RE. Further factors for the estimation of mean glandular dose using the United Kingdom, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54(14):4361-72. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/14/002. [PubMed: 19550001].
  • 17. Hauge IH, Pedersen K, Olerud HM, Hole EO, Hofvind S. The risk of radiation-induced breast cancers due to biennial mammographic screening in women aged 50-69 years is minimal. Acta Radiol. 2014;55(10):1174-9. doi: 10.1177/0284185113514051. [PubMed: 24311702].
  • 18. Gentry JR, DeWerd LA. TLD measurements of in vivo mammographic exposures and the calculated mean glandular dose across the United States. Med Phys. 1996;23(6):899-903. doi: 10.1118/1.597824. [PubMed: 8798175].
  • 19. Kruger RL, Schueler BA. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography. Med Phys. 2001;28(7):1449-54. doi: 10.1118/1.1382606. [PubMed: 11488578].
  • 20. Moran P, Chevalier M, Ten JI, Fernandez Soto JM, Vano E. A survey of patient dose and clinical factors in a full-field digital mammography system. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):375-9. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nch514. [PubMed: 15933140].
  • 21. Bor D, Tukel S, Olgar T, Aydin E. Variations in breast doses for an automatic mammography unit. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2008;14(3):122-6. [PubMed: 18814131].
  • 22. Hatziioannou KA, Psarrakos K, Molyvda-Athanasopoulou E, Kitis G, Papanastassiou E, Sofroniadis I, et al. Dosimetric considerations in mammography. Eur Radiol. 2000;10(7):1193-6. doi: 10.1007/s003309900209. [PubMed: 11003419].
Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:

Author(s):

Article(s):

Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments