173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11976850)
21. Improving suspicious breast lesion characterization using semi-automatic lesion fractional volume washout kinetic analysis.
Huang J; Hahn T; Hoisington L; Schafer S; Zong X; Berger K
Med Phys; 2011 Nov; 38(11):5998-6009. PubMed ID: 22047364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. BI-RADS® 3 lesions at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: is an initial short-interval follow-up necessary?
Bahrs SD; Baur A; Hattermann V; Hahn M; Vogel U; Claussen CD; Siegmann-Luz KC
Acta Radiol; 2014 Apr; 55(3):260-5. PubMed ID: 23969262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Characteristics, Malignancy Rate, and Follow-up of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Identified at Breast MR Imaging: Implications for MR Image Interpretation and Management.
Chikarmane SA; Birdwell RL; Poole PS; Sippo DA; Giess CS
Radiology; 2016 Sep; 280(3):707-15. PubMed ID: 27089027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Dynamic bilateral contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: trade-off between spatial and temporal resolution.
Kuhl CK; Schild HH; Morakkabati N
Radiology; 2005 Sep; 236(3):789-800. PubMed ID: 16118161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Real-time MRI navigated US: role in diagnosis and guided biopsy of incidental breast lesions and axillary lymph nodes detected on breast MRI but not on second look US.
Pons EP; Azcón FM; Casas MC; Meca SM; Espona JLG
Eur J Radiol; 2014 Jun; 83(6):942-950. PubMed ID: 24725672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Stereotactic core-needle breast biopsy by surgeons: minimum 2-year follow-up of benign lesions.
Burns RP; Brown JP; Roe SM; Sprouse LR; Yancey AE; Witherspoon LE
Ann Surg; 2000 Oct; 232(4):542-8. PubMed ID: 10998652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Breast MRI as an adjunct to mammography: Does it really suffer from low specificity? A retrospective analysis stratified by mammographic BI-RADS classes.
Benndorf M; Baltzer PA; Vag T; Gajda M; Runnebaum IB; Kaiser WA
Acta Radiol; 2010 Sep; 51(7):715-21. PubMed ID: 20707656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Diagnostic performance of initial enhancement analysis using ultra-fast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for breast lesions.
Goto M; Sakai K; Yokota H; Kiba M; Yoshida M; Imai H; Weiland E; Yokota I; Yamada K
Eur Radiol; 2019 Mar; 29(3):1164-1174. PubMed ID: 30088064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. MRI-detected suspicious breast lesions: predictive values of kinetic features measured by computer-aided evaluation.
Wang LC; DeMartini WB; Partridge SC; Peacock S; Lehman CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Sep; 193(3):826-31. PubMed ID: 19696298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Breast lesions classified as probably benign (BI-RADS 3) on magnetic resonance imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Spick C; Bickel H; Polanec SH; Baltzer PA
Eur Radiol; 2018 May; 28(5):1919-1928. PubMed ID: 29168006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Characterization of the enhancing lesions on dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with interstitial mammoplasty.
Kim TY; Kim SH; Kang BJ; Kim HS; Cha ES; Kim JY; Song BJ
Eur J Radiol; 2013 Dec; 82(12):2205-11. PubMed ID: 24103354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Diagnosis of breast cancer at dynamic MRI in patients with breast augmentation by paraffin or silicone injection.
Youk JH; Son EJ; Kim EK; Kim JA; Kim MJ; Kwak JY; Lee SM
Clin Radiol; 2009 Dec; 64(12):1175-80. PubMed ID: 19913126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors.
Boetes C; Strijk SP; Holland R; Barentsz JO; Van Der Sluis RF; Ruijs JH
Eur Radiol; 1997; 7(8):1231-4. PubMed ID: 9377507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Characteristics of probably benign breast MRI lesions.
Eby PR; DeMartini WB; Gutierrez RL; Saini MH; Peacock S; Lehman CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Sep; 193(3):861-7. PubMed ID: 19696303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Combined reading of Contrast Enhanced and Diffusion Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging by using a simple sum score.
Baltzer A; Dietzel M; Kaiser CG; Baltzer PA
Eur Radiol; 2016 Mar; 26(3):884-91. PubMed ID: 26115653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Application value of 3T ¹H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy in diagnosing breast tumors.
Vassiou K; Tsougos I; Kousi E; Vlychou M; Athanasiou E; Theodorou K; Arvanitis DL; Fezoulidis IV
Acta Radiol; 2013 May; 54(4):380-8. PubMed ID: 23436823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging in men: preliminary results.
Morakkabati-Spitz N; Schild HH; Leutner CC; von Falkenhausen M; Lutterbey G; Kuhl CK
Radiology; 2006 Feb; 238(2):438-45. PubMed ID: 16371581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer.
Berg WA; Gutierrez L; NessAiver MS; Carter WB; Bhargavan M; Lewis RS; Ioffe OB
Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):830-49. PubMed ID: 15486214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Computer-aided classification of BI-RADS category 3 breast lesions.
Buchbinder SS; Leichter IS; Lederman RB; Novak B; Bamberger PN; Sklair-Levy M; Yarmish G; Fields SI
Radiology; 2004 Mar; 230(3):820-3. PubMed ID: 14739315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability.
Kinkel K; Helbich TH; Esserman LJ; Barclay J; Schwerin EH; Sickles EA; Hylton NM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2000 Jul; 175(1):35-43. PubMed ID: 10882243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
