title: [Film-screen mammography versus digital storage plate mammography: hard copy and monitor display of microcalcifications and focal findings--a retrospective clinical and histologic analysis].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  A retrospective clinical-histological study to determine the diagnostic accuracy of mammography using conventional screen-film cassettes (hard copy), high-resolution digital phosphor storage plates (hard copy) and monitor display (soft copy) for microcalcifications and focal lesions (BI-RADS (TM) category 4 or 5).
  
  
  METHODS
  From April to November 2001, 76 patients underwent conventional film-screen mammography and, after diagnosis and preoperative wire localization, digital mammography with the same exposure parameters. Five investigators retrospectively determined the diagnosis after the operation from randomly distributed mediolateral views (hard-copy reading) and from the monitor display (soft-copy reading). These results were correlated with the final histology.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The accuracy of conventional screen-film mammography, digital mammography and monitor-displayed mammography was 67%, 65% and 68% for all findings, (n = 76), 59%, 59% and 68% for microcalcifications (n = 44) and 75%, 72% and 63% for focal lesions (n = 32). The overall results showed no difference.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our findings indicate equivalence of conventional screen-film mammography, high-resolution digital phosphor storage plate mammography and monitor-displayed mammography.
authors.affiliation: Institut für Diagnostische Radiologie, Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg.
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Schulz-Wendtland
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Wenkel
authors.forename: U
authors.initials: U
authors.lastname: Aichinger
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Tartsch
authors.forename: I
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Kuchar
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Bödicker
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Evertsz
authors.forename: H-O
authors.initials: HO
authors.lastname: Peitgen
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Bautz
mesh_terms: D000230:Adenocarcinoma / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001941:Breast Diseases / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D018270:Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D018275:Carcinoma, Lobular / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D018276:Carcinoma, Medullary / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D005260:Female; D018226:Fibroadenoma / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D005355:Fibrosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D006801:Humans; D008067:Lipoma / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D008327:Mammography / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D010212:Papilloma / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D011856:Radiographic Image Enhancement; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
vernacular_title: Film-Folien-Mammographie versus digitale Mammographie mit Speicherfolien: Mikrokalzifikationen und Herdbefunde, Hartkopie- und Monitorbefundung--eine retrospektiv klinisch/histologische Analyse (n = 76).