Thursday, 29 November 2007


  1. Adding tomosynthesis to FFDM reduces callbacks by 43%, regardless of breast density (Boston)
  2. Comparison of Tomosynthesis and FFDM in an OP symptomatic setting (Amsterdam) - No differences found between the 2 techniques in their population
  3. Tomosynthesis vs conventional: comparison of breast mass detection and characterisation (Ann Arbor) - More masses detected by tomosynthesis. Better margin assessment but same malignancy rating
  4. Comparison of FDDM and SFM within a population based UK screening programme (Barts, London) - Similar recall rates, cancer detection and PPV. FFDM detects larger invasive tumours in the 50-60 age group
  5. Digital monitor zooming vs magnificaton FFDM ( Korea) - Better quality of image and increased confidence of diagnosis of radiologists when using magnification rather than simple magnification
  6. Improved diagnostic accuracy with contrast enhanced FFDM (Berlin)
  7. Technical recall rates FFDM vs SFM (Houston) - digital significantly LOWER TR rate regardless of whether there were prior mammograms available