Radiation dose from digital breast tomosynthesis screening – A comparison with full field digital mammography

Raed M.K. Raed*, Andrew England, Andrew K. Tootell, Peter Hogg

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (journal)peer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To compare Mean Glandular Dose (MGD) and effective dose from digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening with that from full field digital mammography (FFDM) screening. Method: To simulate compressed breasts, two Perspex-polyethylene breast phantoms were used, one phantom for compressed breast in craniocaudal and the other for compressed breast in mediolateral oblique. An adult ATOM dosimetry phantom was loaded with high sensitivity thermoluminescence dosimeters; the phantom was then positioned on Hologic Selenia Dimensions mammographic machine to imitate DBT and 4-view FFDM screening. Organ radiation doses were measured from 4-view DBT and 4-view FFDM (craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique views for each breast). Organ radiation doses were used to calculate effective dose from one screening session. Results: MGD for DBT was 3.6 mGy; MGD for FFDM was 2.8 mGy. For DBT, other organs (e.g. thymus, lungs, salivary glands, thyroid, contralateral breast and bone marrow) radiation dose was also higher than for FFDM. The use of DBT for breast cancer screening increases the effective dose (E) of one screening session by 22%. E for DBT was 0.44 mSv; E for FFDM was 0.34 mSv. Conclusion: The use of DBT for breast cancer screening increases the radiation dose to screening clients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)599-603
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences
Volume51
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Dec 2020

Keywords

  • Breast cancer
  • Breast imaging
  • Dosimetry
  • Organ dose

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Radiation dose from digital breast tomosynthesis screening – A comparison with full field digital mammography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this