Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Jan;82(1):2-11.
doi: 10.3348/jksr.2021.0004. Epub 2021 Jan 31.

[Digital Mammography as a Screening Tool in Korea]

[Article in Korean]
Soo Yeon Song, Seri Hong, Jae Kwan Jun
Review

[Digital Mammography as a Screening Tool in Korea]

[Article in Korean]
Soo Yeon Song et al. Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi. 2021 Jan.

Abstract
in English, Korean

More than 4 million women undergo breast cancer (BC) screening with mammography each year in Korea. Digital mammography (DM) was introduced in 2000, and it has been reported to have a higher diagnostic accuracy than screen-film mammography (SFM) or computed radiography (CR) in women with dense breasts. According to a study using data from the National Cancer Screening Program for BC, the diagnostic accuracy of DM was higher than those of SFM and CR, regardless of age, breast density, and screening round. Currently, despite high supply rate among OECD countries, the distribution of DM equipment is approximately 35% in Korea. For quick replacement with DM, it will be necessary to improve its fee for the National Health Insurance and support an educational program for radiologists. In addition, efforts should be made to increase the accessibility of DM.

국가암검진사업에서 매년 400만 명 이상의 여성이 유방촬영술을 이용한 유방암 검진을 받고 있다. 2000년 디지털 유방촬영술의 도입 이후, 선행 연구들에 의하면 디지털 유방촬영술은 치밀유방을 가진 여성에서 제한적으로 기존의 필름 방식 또는 computed radiography (이하 CR)보다 높은 진단 정확도를 보고하였다. 최근 국가암검진사업에서 수행된 자료를 분석한 결과에 따르면 디지털 유방촬영술의 진단 정확도가 필름 또는 CR 방식에 비해서 치밀유방을 가진 여성뿐만 아니라 모든 연령대의 여성에서 검진 횟수와 상관없이 보다 정확하였다. 우리나라는 OECD 국가 중에서도 높은 유방촬영기기 보급률에도 불구하고 현재 디지털 유방촬영기기의 보급은 전체 유방촬영기기 중, 35% 정도 수준으로 더디기만 하다. 디지털 유방촬영기기로의 신속한 전환을 위하여 수가제도의 개선, 유방 영상 판독 교육 지원 등 관련법과 제도의 정비가 필요할 것이다. 아울러 국가암검진사업에서 보다 많은 여성이 디지털 유방촬영기기를 이용한 유방암 검진을 받을 수 있도록 장비 보급의 지역 간 격차 해소를 위해 노력해야 할 것이다.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Trend in participants of the National Cancer Screening Program for breast cancer from 2002 to 2017 in Korea.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Proportion of the types of mammography equipment used from 2011 to 2020 in Korea.
We used data from the Korean Institute for Accreditation of Medical Imaging and HIRA before 2016 and from 2016, respectively. The data from HIRA can be divided into FFDM and other equipment (SFM and CR) as analog. CR = computed radiography, FFDM = full-field digital mammography, HIRA = Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, SFM = screen-film mammography
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. Forest plot of the estimates of sensitivity and specificity for each study across digital mammography (A) and screen-film mammography (B). The estimates of each study are plotted.
CI = confidence interval, Error bars = calculated 95% CIs.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4. Distribution of FFDM by administrative district (A) and medical utilization area (B) in Korea, 2020.
FFDM = full-field digital mammography
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394–424. - PubMed
    1. Hong S, Won YJ, Park YR, Jung KW, Kong HJ, Lee ES Community of Population-Based Regional Cancer Registries. Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2017. Cancer Res Treat. 2020;52:335–350. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Bouvard V, Bianchini F, et al. Breast-cancer screening--viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2353–2358. - PubMed
    1. Giordano L, von Karsa L, Tomatis M, Majek O, de Wolf C, Lancucki L, et al. Mammographic screening programmes in Europe: organization, coverage and participation. J Med Screen. 2012;19 Suppl 1:72–82. - PubMed
    1. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005;27:353 - PubMed