Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences · 2021
A review of screening mammography: The benefits and radiation risks put into perspective.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hooshmand Sahand, Reed Warren M, Suleiman Mo'ayyad E, Brennan Patrick C
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: In medical imaging a benefit to risk analysis is required when justifying or implementing diagnostic procedures. Screening mammography is no exception and in particular concerns around the use of radiation to help diagnose cancer must be addressed.
METHODS: The Medline database and various established reports on breast screening and radiological protection were utilised to explore this review.
RESULTS/DISCUSSION: The benefit of screening is well argued; the ability to detect and treat breast cancer has led to a 91% 5-year survival rate and 497 deaths prevented from breast cancer amongst 100,000 screened women. Subsequently, screening guidelines by various countries recommend annual, biennial or triennial screening from ages somewhere between 40-74 years. Whilst the literature presents different perspectives on screening younger and older women, the current evidence of benefit for screening women <40 and ≥75 years is currently not strong. The radiation dose and associated risk delivered to each woman for a single examination is dependent upon age, breast density and breast thickness, however the average mean glandular dose is around 2.5-3 mGy, and this would result in 65 induced cancers and 8 deaths per 100,000 women over a screening lifetime from 40-74 years. This results in a ratio of lives saved to deaths from induced cancer of 62:1.
CONCLUSION: Therefore, compared to the potential mortality reduction achievable with screening mammography, the risk is small.
METHODS: The Medline database and various established reports on breast screening and radiological protection were utilised to explore this review.
RESULTS/DISCUSSION: The benefit of screening is well argued; the ability to detect and treat breast cancer has led to a 91% 5-year survival rate and 497 deaths prevented from breast cancer amongst 100,000 screened women. Subsequently, screening guidelines by various countries recommend annual, biennial or triennial screening from ages somewhere between 40-74 years. Whilst the literature presents different perspectives on screening younger and older women, the current evidence of benefit for screening women <40 and ≥75 years is currently not strong. The radiation dose and associated risk delivered to each woman for a single examination is dependent upon age, breast density and breast thickness, however the average mean glandular dose is around 2.5-3 mGy, and this would result in 65 induced cancers and 8 deaths per 100,000 women over a screening lifetime from 40-74 years. This results in a ratio of lives saved to deaths from induced cancer of 62:1.
CONCLUSION: Therefore, compared to the potential mortality reduction achievable with screening mammography, the risk is small.