These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Comparison of full-field digital mammography workstation and conventional picture archiving and communication system in image quality and diagnostic performance.
    Author: Kang BJ, Kim SH, Choi BG.
    Journal: Clin Imaging; 2011; 35(5):336-40. PubMed ID: 21872121.
    Abstract:
    The object of this study was to compare of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) workstation and conventional picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) in image quality and diagnostic performance. We assembled 80 masses and 80 microcalcifications. Images were displayed on workstation, 5M, and 3M PACS monitors. The image quality for mammograms on workstation was significantly better than that for mammograms on PACS monitors. The sensitivity and NPV for microcalcifications on workstation were higher than those on PACS monitors. The conventional PACS cannot substitute for a FFDM workstation for mammographic evaluation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]