Survey of Mean Glandular Dose to Patients During Mammography Examinations: A Retrospective Study

Authors

  • Edem Sosu  Radiological and Medical Sciences Research Institute, Ghana Atomic Energy Commission. Kwabenya, Accra and Graduate School of Nuclear and Allied Sciences, University of Ghana Atomic Campus, University of Ghana. Legon, Accra.
  • Mary Boadu  Radiological and Medical Sciences Research Institute, Ghana Atomic Energy Commission. Kwabenya, Accra and Graduate School of Nuclear and Allied Sciences, University of Ghana Atomic Campus, University of Ghana. Legon, Accra.
  • Albertina Oheneba – Williams  Greater Accra Regional Hospital, Accra. Ghana.
  • Eric Otu – Danquah  Greater Accra Regional Hospital, Accra. Ghana.
  • Annabel Ankrah  Greater Accra Regional Hospital, Accra. Ghana.
  • Doreen N. Odotei  Greater Accra Regional Hospital, Accra. Ghana.
  • Edwin Okoampa Boadu  Faculty of Health and Allied Sciences, Koforidua Technical University, Koforidua, Eastern Region.
  • Prince Rockson   Department of Medical Imaging, School of Allied Sciences Health, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho.

DOI:

https://doi.org//10.32628/IJSRST218144

Keywords:

Mammography, Mean glandular dose, quality control, Signal-to-noise ratio, image quality

Abstract

The radiation dose delivered to patients undergoing mammography examination is of utmost importance because of the risk of cancer induction due to the process. In this work, we analyze the dose to 109 patients (214 images) who underwent mammographic examinations with a full-field digital mammography (FFDM) system. Quality control assessment was first performed using the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Human Health Series 2 and 17 protocol and the European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. The results from the quality control test performed indicates that the system is functioning well. The mean glandular dose of patients analyzed shows that 23 out of 109 patients received averaged doses higher than the acceptable level at the same equivalent breast thickness of a phantom. The mammography system at the department is recommended for continuous use for imaging and screening of patients.

References

  1. International Atomic Energy Commission (IAEA). Optimization of the radiological protection of patients: Image quality and dose in mammography (coordinated research in Europe). IAEA-TEC DOC-1447. May 2005. Page 4
  2. Sosu, E. K., et al., Determination of dose delivery accuracy and image quality in full - Field digital mammography, Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2018.02.002
  3. Donga, L., Chua, T. C., Lee, J. S., Lanc, G. Y., Wua, T. H., Yeh, Y. H., et al. (2002). Estimation of mean-glandular dose from monitoring breast entrances air kerma using a high sensitivity metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor (MOSFET) dosimeter system in mammography. Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 57(2002), 791-799
  4. Dance, D. R., Monte Carlo calculation of conversion factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 1990 Number 35, Pages 1211 – 1219
  5. ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60, Annals of the ICRP, 1991. Volume 21, Pages 1 – 3.
  6. IPSM (Institute of Physical Sciences in Medicine) 1994. The commissioning and routine testing of mammographic X - ray systems. IPSM report 59, 2nd Edition. IPSM, York. Pages 11 – 12
  7. Hogg Peter, Kelly Judith, Mercer Claire. Digital Mammography: A Holistic Approach. Radiation Dose in Mammography. 2015, Pages 153 – 161. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-04831-418.
  8. Hammerstein G R, Miller D W, White D R, Masterson M E, Woodard H Q and Laughlin J S (1979). Absorbed radiation dose in mammography. Radiology Number 130, Pages 485 – 91
  9. Stanton L, Villafana T,Day J L and Lightfoot, D A (1984) Dosage evaluation in mammography Radiology. Number 150. Pages 577-84
  10. Rosenstein M, Andersen L W and Warner G G. (1985). Handbook of Glandular Tissue Doses in Mammography FDA 85-8239 (Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services)
  11. IAEA. (2009). Quality Assurance Program For Screen Film Mammography. IAEA Human Health Series No. 2. Pg 125-130/203-205
  12. IAEA. (2011). Quality Assurance Program for Digital Mammography. IAEA Human Health Series No. 17. Pg 109-114
  13. EC (2006). European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis (fourth edn.) European Commission, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
  14. Elmore, J. G., Miglioretti, D. L., & Carney, P. A. (2003). Does practice make perfect when interpreting mammography? Part II. J Natl Cancer Inst, 95, 250 - 252.

International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology

Downloads

Published

2021-02-28

Issue

Volume 8, Issue 1, January-February-2021

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) IJSRST

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

[1]
Edem Sosu, Mary Boadu,Albertina Oheneba – Williams, Eric Otu – Danquah, Annabel Ankrah, Doreen N. Odotei, Edwin Okoampa Boadu, Prince Rockson , " Survey of Mean Glandular Dose to Patients During Mammography Examinations: A Retrospective Study, International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology(IJSRST), Online ISSN : 2395-602X, Print ISSN : 2395-6011, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp.243-248, January-February-2021. Available at doi : https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST218144