US Approves First 3D Mammography Device

U.S. Navy photo by Ensign Ann-Marie Al Noad

U.S. Navy photo by Ensign Ann-Marie Al Noad

Movies aren’t the only industry jumping on the 3D bandwagon. Now breast cancer screening images can be seen in the third dimension. Via Bloomberg:

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved on Friday the first X-ray mammography device that provides three-dimensional images of the breast for cancer screening and diagnosis.

The Selenia Dimensions System, an upgrade to Massachusetts-based Hologic Inc.’s FDA-approved two-dimensional system, can provide 2-D and 3-D X-ray images of the breasts. The 3-D images may help physicians more accurately detect and diagnose breast cancer, the FDA said in a news release.

“Physicians can now access this unique and innovative 3-D technology that could significantly enhance existing diagnosis and treatment approaches,” said Dr. Jeffrey Shuren, director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health.

[Continues at Bloomberg Business Week]

, , , , , , , ,

  • Haystack

    …and also, they’re installing them in airports.

  • Haystack

    …and also, they’re installing them in airports.

  • Rooti

    This is more high tech medical quackery. Radiation causes cancer. Thermography is considered a superior method of detecting breast cancer, so why aren’t we using that instead?

  • Rooti

    This is more high tech medical quackery. Radiation causes cancer. Thermography is considered a superior method of detecting breast cancer, so why aren’t we using that instead?

  • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

    Mammography is a terrible technology. Because of the physical structure of breast tissue, to get contrast between cancer cells and normal cells in that area, you have to increase radiation dosage dramatically. However to get a 3D image in any form*, you have to multiply the dosage by a large factor. Add 2+duh, and you get a radiation dosage that is probably not medically advisable, and probably does not survive the cost vs. benefits test…

    *edit: Okay you don’t necessarily get the multiplicative effect in the TSA’s body scanners because it works on a different methodology, However that methodology is potentially more risky since the X-rays are in a frequency range(a one that radiologists are told to avoid) that is much more readily absorbed, while in standard X-Rays they mostly pass right though)

  • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

    Mammography is a terrible technology. Because of the physical structure of breast tissue, to get contrast between cancer cells and normal cells in that area, you have to increase radiation dosage dramatically. However to get a 3D image in any form, you have to multiply the dosage by a large factor. Add 2+duh, and you get a radiation dosage that is probably not medically advisable, and probably does not survive the cost vs. benefits test…

  • Simiantongue

    I would have thought the Porn industry would lead the way with this type of 3D breast technology. Learn something new every day.

  • Simiantongue

    I would have thought the Porn industry would lead the way with this type of 3D breast technology. Learn something new every day.

  • http://mammogram.ws/50/mammogram-accuracy/ Mammogram Accuracy

    Airports? Really? How can you have a mammogram screening on airport?

21