The acceptance of a digital mammography system in a public hospital: Challenges and strategies applied in quality control tests

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v12i12.43938

Keywords:

Mammography; Acceptance tests; Quality control.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the applicability of different protocols for conducting tests related to average glandular dose (AGD), automatic exposure control compensation (AEC), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), image uniformity, and artifacts. Methodology: PMMA phantoms were used to simulate the patient. Tests were performed in both STD and STD+ modes. In determining AGD, the phantoms were used to obtain technical exposure parameters. Air kerma was measured using a solid-state detector. In AEC compensation verification, regions of interest were marked in the acquired images. For CNR, a thin layer of contrast material (aluminum) was placed on one of the phantoms; regions of interest (ROIs) were marked in the contrast regions and background. For determining image uniformity, five ROIs were marked in the images. Results: AGD was in compliance in STD mode but exceeded tolerance in STD+ mode for two thicknesses (4 cm and 5 cm) of PMMA. Operating the equipment in STD+ mode resulted in a 57% increase in AGD for the 6 cm thickness and an improvement in the results for the 6 cm and 7 cm thicknesses in the CNR test. Only the 2.5 cm thick phantom exhibited uniformity as stipulated in IN 92. Conclusion: Patients with compressed breast thickness exceeding 7.5 cm are exposed to higher doses due to equipment limitations.

References

Abreu, E. d. & Koifman, S. (2002). Fatores prognósticos no câncer da mama feminina. Rev. bras. cancerol, 113–131.

ANVISA. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (2022). Resolução da Diretoria Colegiada - RDC nº 611, de 9 de março de 2022. https://www.in.gov.br/en/web/dou/-/resolucao-rdc-n-611-de-9-de-marco-de-2022-386107075.

ANVISA. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (2021). Instrução Normativa - IN nº 92, de 27 de maio de 2021. https://www.in.gov.br/en/web/dou/-/instrucao-normativa-in-n-92-de-27-de-maio-de-2021-322985226. Publicado no Diário Oficial da União em 27 de maio de 2021.

Ayala, A. L. M., Anjos, J. C. d., Cassol, G. A & Höfelmann, D. A. (2019). Sobrevida em 10 anos em mulheres com câncer de mama: coorte história de 20002014. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 24:1537–1550.

Azevedo e Silva, G., Bustamante-Teixeira, M. T., Aquino, E. M., Tomazelli, J. G., & dos-Santos-Silva, I. (2014). Acesso à detecção precoce do câncer de mama no Sistema Único de Saúde: uma análise a partir dos dados do Sistema de Informações em Saúde. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 30, 1537-1550.

Barbosa, I. R., Costa, I. d. C. C., Pérez, M. M. B., & Souza, D. L. B. (2015). Mortalidade por câncer de mama nos estados do nordeste do brasil: tendências atuais e projeções até 2030. Revista Ciência Plural, 1(1):04–14.

Buitrago, F., Uemura, G., & Sena, M. C. F. (2011). Fatores prognósticos em câncer de mama. Comun. ciênc. saúde, 69–81.

Bushberg, J. T., Seibert, J. A., Leidholdt Jr., E. M., & Boone, J. M. (2020). The essential physics of medical imaging. (4a ed.) Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Corrêa, R. D. S., Peixoto, J. E., de Souza Ferreira, R., & Freitas-Junior, R (2013). Risco de câncer radioinduzido em rastreamento mamográfico. Regional Congress on Radiation Protection and Safety.

Corrêa, R. D. S., Freitas-Júnior, R., Peixoto, J. E., Rodrigues, D. C. N., Lemos, M. E. D. F., Marins, L. A. P., & Silveira, É. A. D. (2011). Estimativas da cobertura mamográfica no Estado de Goiás, Brasil. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 27, 1757-1767.

Costa L. S., Carmo A. L. O. do Firmiano G. G. D., Monteiro J. de S. S., Faria L. B., & Gomides L. F. (2021). Fatores de risco relacionados ao câncer de mama e a importância da detecção precoce para a saúde da mulher. Revista Eletrônica Acervo Científico, 31, e8174. https://doi.org/10.25248/reac.e8174.2021

Dance D. R. (1990). Monte Carlo calculation of conversion factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose. Physics in medicine and biology, 35(9), 1211–1219. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/35/9/002

Engler, C., Attie, M. R. P., Reis, L. P., Squair, P. L., Chevalier, M., & do Socorro Nogueira, M. (2020). Estudo sobre fatores intrínsecos a paciente que influenciam na dose glandular média em exames de tomossíntese de mama. Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences, 8(1).

Engler, C., do Socorro Nogueira, M., & Gomes, D. S. (2023) Estudo da localização da densidade mamária pontual em diferentes espessuras da mama comprimida. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica, 17:703–703.

Furquim, T. A. & Costa, P. R. (2009). Garantia de qualidade em radiologia diagnóstica. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica, 3(1):91–99.

IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency (2011a). Implementation of the International Code of Practice on Dosimetry in Diagnostic Radiology (TRS 457): Review of Test Results, IAEA Human Health Reports No. 4, IAEA, Vienna.

IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency (2011b). Quality Assurance Programme for Digital Mammography, IAEA Human Health Series No. 17, IAEA, Vienna.

IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency (2021). Protocolos de control de calidade para Radiodiagnóstico en América Latina y el Caribe - TECDOC 1958, Vienna.

INCA. Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva (2022). Detecção precoce do câncer. https://www.gov.br/inca/pt-br

Maulaz, C. M., Valentini, B. B., Silva, A.M, & Papaleo, R. M. (2019). Estudo comparativo do desempenho de imagens por ressonância magnética, mamografia e ecografia na avaliação de lesões mamárias benignas e malignas. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica (online).

Oduko, J. M., & Mackenzie, A. (2019). Technical evaluation of GE healthcare Senographe Pristina digital mammography system in 2d mode (NHSBSP Equipment Report). Public Health England, London.

Paulinelli, R. R., Moreira, M. A. R., & Freitas Júnior, R. d. (2004). A importância do diagnóstico precoce do câncer de mama. Femina, 233–237.

Rodriguez, C. M. L., & Pérez, J. M. H. (2016). Importancia del diagnóstico precoz en el cáncer de mama. Revista Cubana de Tecnología de la Salud, 7(1), 67-76.

SEFM, SEPR, SERAM (2011). Protocolo Español de Control de Calidad en Radiodiagnóstico. Senda Editorial S. A.

Vilaverde, F., Rocha, A., Sousa, M. R., Mesquita, R., & Reis, A. (2016). Tomossíntese mamária: o que o radiologista deve saber. Acta Radiológica Portuguesa, 28(109):35–41.

Downloads

Published

12/11/2023

How to Cite

LISBOA, B. F. de O. .; OLIVEIRA, C. G. de .; ATTIE, M. R. P. . The acceptance of a digital mammography system in a public hospital: Challenges and strategies applied in quality control tests. Research, Society and Development, [S. l.], v. 12, n. 12, p. e43121243938, 2023. DOI: 10.33448/rsd-v12i12.43938. Disponível em: https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/43938. Acesso em: 22 dec. 2024.

Issue

Vol. 12 No. 12

Section

Exact and Earth Sciences

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Bruno Fabricio de Oliveira Lisboa; Carolline Gomes de Oliveira; Márcia Regina Pereira Attie

Creative Commons License

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

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.