Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is a relatively new and promising techniques in mammography [1, 2]: it can be use in addition or as a replacement for traditional viewing, in both cases an increase in mean glandular dose (MGD) is registered. To compare clinical dose differences of DBT with that of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in diagnostic population, mammographic examination acquisition data were collected in order to determine entrance surface air kerma (ESAK) and MGD.

acquisition parameters data were collected for 100 mammographic exams in order to estimate MGD in FFDM, DBT and COMBO modality: the aim is to analyze MGD when DBT is use in substitution of FFDM and mainly when it is used in addition of FFDM in-depth examinations, BESAK was calculated using ionization chamber measurement placed at reference point for each anode/filter/tube potential and modality combinations used in clinical routine in AEC modality, in DBT modality BESAK was measured during the 15° arc scan (from -7.5° to...

Acquisition parameter data analysis performed for 100 mammographies shows that using DBT as a replacement for FFDM the increase is 18% in average ESAK and 30% in MGD, with 3 mGy as average MGD for single view. Using COMBO modality (two different views) the increase is of 110% in average ESAK and of 150 % in MGD, 3,4 mGy average MGD with 57 mm average breast thickness. Percentage difference between FFDM and DBT modality are studied as a function of PPMA thickness (x) as illustrated...

DBT increase ESAK and MGD, but values are within EUREF Guidelines 2006, even with COMBO modality. Anyway physician must be aware of these values, that means this technique must not be overuse: in our Institute a multicenter IRB-approved protocol is ongoing. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performances (sensitivity and specificity) of DBT compared to FFDM and to evaluate the eventual impact of DBT in a clinical environment: it is planned to perform a COMBO acquisition for each woman with a...

[1] J. T. Dobbins III and D. J. Godfrey, “Digital x-ray tomosynthesis: Current state of the art and clinical potential“ Phy. Med. Biol. 48, R65-106 (2003) [2] W.F.Good, G.S.Abrams, VJCatullo, et al. “Digital breast tomosynthesis: a pilot observer study” AJR, 190, 865–869 (2008) [3] European Commission (EC) “European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis” 4th edition 2006 http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_projects/2002/cancer/fp_cancer_2002_ext_guid_01.pdf [4] D.R.Dance “Monte Carlo calculation of conversion factor for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose” Phy. Med. Biol. 35, 1211-19 (1990) [5]...