Advertisement

Analysis of patient breast dose from a mammographic biopsy unit

  • Donald McLeanEmail author
  • Lewis Ryan
  • Lisa Robertson
Scientific Paper
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

Further assessment of suspicious lesions found during asymptomatic breast cancer screening is critical and involves mammographic follow up with biopsy. The X-ray procedure is complex and variable in nature and until now there is little information on the radiation dose to the breast or associated risks. A survey of radiation doses from a Siemens MammoTest prone biopsy with the support of a Sectra L30 AIR mammographic unit for workup and post clip images has been completed. Procedure details and outcomes, including radiographic and patient related variables have been collected and analysed using standard dosimetric formulation. The partial irradiation of the breast in biopsy and magnification views was considered. The average mean glandular breast dose was 5.13 mGy, comprising of 3.52 mGy from the biopsy procedure and 1.61 mGy from the workup and post clip images, with an average of 8.4 biopsy images and 5.8 workup and post clip images. The risk from these dose levels are dependent on the age of the woman, however are not considered high for a symptomatic X-ray procedure.

Keywords

Mammographic dose Biopsy Mean glandular dose 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Institutional ethics approval was obtained: ethlr.13.258 “Estimation of subject breast dose from mammographic stereotactic vacuum assisted biopsies”.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Yaffe MJ, Mainprize JG (2011) Risk of radiation-induced breast cancer from mammographic screening. Radiology 258(1):98–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hendrick RE (2010) Radiation doses and cancer risks from breast imaging studies. Radiology 257(1):246–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mahoney MC, Newell MS (2013) Breast intervention: how I do it. Radiology 268(1):12–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ames V, Britton PD (2011) Stereotactically guided breast biopsy: a review. Insights Imaging 2 2:171–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    International Commission on Radiological Protection (2008) The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection, Elsevier Rep. ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP 37:2–4. http://www.sciencedirect.com
  6. 6.
    Wu X, Gingold EL, Barnes GT, Tucker DM (1994) Normalized average glandular dose in molybdenum target-rhodium filter and rhodium target-rhodium filter mammography. Radiology 193(1):83–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (2006) Patient Dosimetry for X Rays Used in Medical Imaging, ICRU Rep. 74, Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Atomic Energy Agency (2007) Dosimetry in diagnostic radiology: an international code of practice, edn. 457 T, IAEA Rep. TRS 457, Vienna. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/TRS457_web.pdf. Accessed Jan 2019
  9. 9.
    NHSBSP (2007) Commissioning and routine testing of small field digital mammography systems, NHS Cancer Screening Programmes Rep. NHSBSP Equipment Report 0705, SheffieldGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sobol WT, Wu X (1997) Parametrization of mammography normalized average glandular dose tables. Med Phys 24(4):547–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sarno A et al (2017) A Monte Carlo model for mean glandular dose evaluation in spot compression mammography. Med Phys 44(7):3848–3860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dance DR, Skinner CL, Young KC, Beckett JR, Kotre CJ (2000) Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol. Phys Med Biol 45(11):3225–3240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klein R et al (1997) Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients. Phys Med Biol 42(4):651–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    National Research Council of the National Academies (2006) Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation; BEIR VII phase 2, Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation. National Academies Press, Washington, DC. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=030909156X. Accessed Jan 2019

Copyright information

© Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Medical Physics and Radiation EngineeringThe Canberra HospitalWodenAustralia
  2. 2.ACT BreastScreen, ACT HealthCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations