Enhancement of Screen Film Mammogram Up to a Level of Digital Mammogram

  • Aparna Bhale
  • Manish Joshi
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 276)


Breast cancer is one of the major causes of death among women. If a cancer can be detected early, the options of treatment and the chances of total recovery will increase. From a woman’s point of view, the procedure practiced (compression of breasts to record an image) to obtain a digital mammogram (DM) is exactly the same that is used to obtain a screen film mammogram (SFM). The quality of DM is undoubtedly better than SFM.

However, obtaining DM is costlier and very few institutions can afford DM machines. According to the National Cancer Institute 92% of breast imaging centers in India do not have digital mammography machines [14] and they depend on the conventional SFM.

Hence in this context, one should answer ‘Can SFM be enhanced up to a level of DM?’ In this paper we discuss, our experimental analysis in this regard. We applied elementary image enhancement techniques to obtain enhanced SFM. We performed the quality analysis of digital mammogram and enhanced SFM using standard metrics like PSNR and RMSE on more than 350 mammograms. The results showed that the clarity of processed SFM is as good as digital mammogram.


Mammogram SFM histogram PSNR RMSE 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Berns, E.A., Edward Hendrick, R., et al.: Digital and Screen- Film Mammography: Comparison of Image Acquisition and Interpretation Times. American Journal of Radiology/org/cgi (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dehghani, S., et al.: A Method For Improve Preprocessing Images Mammography. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 1(1) (April 2011) ISSN: 2010-3689Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Keen, J.D.: MBA Stroger Hospital of Cook County Chicago, IL 60612, Annals of Internal Medicine 248, American College of Physicians (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kerlikowske, K., et al.: Comparative Effectiveness of Digital Versus Film-Screen Mammography in Community Practice in the United States - A Cohort Study. Ann. Intern. Med. 155, 493–502 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kerlikowske, K., Hubbard, R.A., Miglioretti, D.L., Geller, B.M., Yankaskas, B.C., Lehman, C.D., et al.: Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann. Intern. Med. 155, 493–502 (2011) (PMID: 22007043)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kerlikowske, K.: A call for evidence of benefits outweighing harms before implementing new technologies: comment on Diffusion of computer-aided mammography after mandated Medicare coverage. Arch. Intern. Med. 170, 990–991 (2010) (PMID: 20548014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim, H.H., Pisano, E.D., Cole, E.B., et al.: Comparison of calcication specicity in digital mammography using soft-copy display versus screen-lm mammography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 187, 47–50 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Koomen, M., Pisano, E.D., et al.: Future Directions in Breast Imaging. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 1674–1677 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Joshi, M., Bhale, A.K.: Computational Unfoldment of Mammograms. In: Proceedings of PRIME 2012, March 21-23. IEEE Xplore, Salem (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pisano, E.D., Gatsonis, C., Hendrick, E., Yaffe, M., Baum, J., Acharyya, S., Conant, E., Fajardo, L., Bassett, L., DOrsi, C., Jong, R., Rebner, M.: Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast cancer screening. New England J. Med. 353(17), 1773–1783 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stephan, P.: Digital Mammography Compares Well With Film Mammography New and Old Machines Equally Accurate - Younger Women Benefit Most, Guide (updated June 15, 2010) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tice, J.A., Feldman, M.: Full-eld digital mammography compared with screen-lm mammography in the detection of breast cancer: rays of light through DMIST or more fog? Breast Cancer Res. Treat. (March 22, 2007), doi:10.1007/s10549-007-9545-4Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iared, W., et al.: Comparative evaluation of digital mammography and film mammography: systematic review and meta-analysis. Sao Paulo Med. J. 129(4), 250–260 (2011); Med. 155, 493–502 (2011); Annals of Internal Medicine 155(8), W–155 (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aparna Bhale
    • 1
  • Manish Joshi
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer SciencesNorth Maharashtra UniversityJalgaonIndia

Personalised recommendations