Studies comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography in breast cancer screening: updated review

Abstract

Full-field digital mammography (FFDM) has several potential benefits as compared with screen-film mammography (SFM) in mammography screening. Digital technology also opens for implementation of advanced applications, including computer-aided detection (CAD) and tomosynthesis. Phantom studies and experimental clinical studies have shown that FFDM is equal or slightly superior to SFM for detection and characterization of mammographic abnormalities. Despite obvious advantages, the conversion to digital mammography has been slower than anticipated, and not only due to higher costs. Until very recently, some countries did not even permit the use of digital mammography in breast cancer screening. The reason for this reluctant attitude was concern about lower spatial resolution and about using soft-copy reading. Furthermore, there was a lack of data supporting improved diagnostic accuracy using FFDM in a screening setting, since two pioneer trials both showed nonsignificantly lower cancer detection rate at FFDM. The 10 studies comparing FFDM and SFM in mammography screening published so far have shown divergent and rather conflicting results. Nevertheless, there is a rapid conversion to digital mammography in breast cancer screening in many western countries. The aim of this article is to give an updated review of these studies, discuss the conflicting findings, and draw some conclusions from the results.