Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Correction (v195,p877)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Russell, D. G.
Right arrow Articles by Ziewacz, J. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Russell, D. G.
Right arrow Articles by Ziewacz, J. T.

Radiology, Vol 194, 383-387, Copyright © 1995 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Pressures in a simulated breast subjected to compression forces comparable to those of mammography. Work in Progress [published erratum appears in Radiology 1995 Jun;195(3):877]

DG Russell and JT Ziewacz
Department of Radiology, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, John Dempsey Hospital, Farmington 06032.

PURPOSE: To determine the magnitude and distribution of pressures in breast models subjected to mammographic compression forces. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A vinyl-wrapped, unleavened-bread-dough breast model was compressed. Pressures in the dough models were measured with a strain gauge connected to a water-filled sensor. RESULTS: Under broad compression, pressures were uniform (range, 2.76-22.06 kPa [0.4-3.2 psi]). Spot compression increased pressures by as much as 60%. Pressures dropped sharply outside of paddle margins. No pressure differentials were found near small, deep simulated masses. The pressure of large masses increased by 50% when subjected to full compression force. Vigorous digital palpation resulted in a pressure of more than 41.40 kPa (6 psi). CONCLUSION: General pressures were mild and uniform. Internal pressures varied inversely with the area to which force was applied. Pressure dissemination was restricted by the cohesive binder and allowed zones of greater pressure to form directly under the applied force. The surrounding matrix disseminated pressure and protected small masses; large masses, bearing the force of the paddle, were exposed to greater pressure. Digital palpation administered high pressures.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1995 by the Radiological Society of North America.