{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023133543638275498, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005257623554153523, 'mean_word_length': 5.82078853046595, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Visualization of microcalcifications on mammographies obtained by digital full-field mammography in comparison to conventional film-screen mammography].

PURPOSE
To evaluate the visualization of microcalcifications on mammographies obtained by full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in comparison to conventional film-screen mammography (FSM).


MATERIAL AND METHODS
Forty-seven digital and film-screen mammographies depicting histologically proven lesions (27 benign, 20 malignant) were assessed by 4 readers. The images obtained with the different systems were comparable in terms of positioning. Maximum time interval between film-screen mammography and digital mammography was three months. Using a questionnaire, the readers evaluated the number of microcalcifications and their subjective conspicuity for FFDM (Senographe 2000D, GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, USA) and FSM. A 7-point scale based on the BIRADS classification was used to characterize the calcifications by means of ROC analysis.


RESULTS
No statistically significant differences were seen between the two types of mammography among the readers in assessing the number of microcalcifications. The subjective conspicuity of microcalcifications was found to be significantly better for digital mammographies. The diagnosis assigned by the readers did not show significant differences between the two systems.


CONCLUSION
Although the subjective conspicuity of microcalcifications was found to be significantly better on digital mammography compared to film-screen mammography, there was no significant advantage of digital mammography resulting from the higher contrast resolution nor a disadvantage in terms of characterization of microcalcifications resulting from the lower spacial resolution. The advantages of digital mammography (e. g. CAD-systems, archiving, dose reduction) can be used without a loss of diagnostic quality.