These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12553348)
1. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to diagnostic accuracy of lesion characterization in breast tissue biopsy specimens. Kuzmiak CM; Millnamow GA; Qaqish B; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Brown ME Acad Radiol; 2002 Dec; 9(12):1378-82. PubMed ID: 12553348 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Fast 3D Near-infrared breast imaging using indocyanine green for detection and characterization of breast lesions. Schneider P; Piper S; Schmitz CH; Schreiter NF; Volkwein N; Lüdemann L; Malzahn U; Poellinger A Rofo; 2011 Oct; 183(10):956-63. PubMed ID: 21972043 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison between breast MRI and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography. Łuczyńska E; Heinze-Paluchowska S; Hendrick E; Dyczek S; Ryś J; Herman K; Blecharz P; Jakubowicz J Med Sci Monit; 2015 May; 21():1358-67. PubMed ID: 25963880 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Diagnostic value of ADC and rADC of diffusion weighted imaging in malignant breast lesions]. Xie CM; Yin SH; Li H; Liu XW; Zhang Y; Lü YC; Zhang R; Li JP; Geng ZJ; Wu PH Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2010 Mar; 32(3):217-20. PubMed ID: 20450592 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Follow-up of B3 breast lesions without residual microcalcifications post vacuum-assisted biopsy, can contrast-enhanced digital mammography help? Bicchierai G; Nori J; De Benedetto D; Boeri C; Vanzi E; Bianchi S; Kaur Gill M; Cirone D; Miele V Breast J; 2020 Feb; 26(2):299-302. PubMed ID: 31486197 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Second reading of breast imaging at the hospital department of radiology: reasonable or waste of money?]. Teifke A; Vomweg TW; Hlawatsch A; Nasresfahani A; Kern A; Victor A; Schmidt M; Bittinger F; Düber C Rofo; 2006 Mar; 178(3):330-6. PubMed ID: 16508842 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography with new reconstruction and new processing for dose reduction. Endo T; Morita T; Oiwa M; Suda N; Sato Y; Ichihara S; Shiraiwa M; Yoshikawa K; Horiba T; Ogawa H; Hayashi Y; Sendai T; Arai T Breast Cancer; 2018 Mar; 25(2):159-166. PubMed ID: 28956298 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical MR mammography: impact of hormonal status on background enhancement and diagnostic accuracy. Baltzer PA; Dietzel M; Vag T; Burmeister H; Gajda M; Camara O; Pfleiderer SO; Kaiser WA Rofo; 2011 May; 183(5):441-7. PubMed ID: 21318935 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A comparison of the accuracy of film-screen mammography, full-field digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis. Michell MJ; Iqbal A; Wasan RK; Evans DR; Peacock C; Lawinski CP; Douiri A; Wilson R; Whelehan P Clin Radiol; 2012 Oct; 67(10):976-81. PubMed ID: 22625656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Impact of full-field digital mammography on pre-operative diagnosis and surgical treatment of mammographic microcalcification. Bundred SM; Zhou J; Whiteside S; Morris J; Wilson M; Hurley E; Bundred N Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2014 Jan; 143(2):359-66. PubMed ID: 24318468 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 3-T breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography. Stehouwer BL; Merckel LG; Verkooijen HM; Peters NH; Mann RM; Duvivier KM; Mali WP; Peeters PH; Veldhuis WB; van den Bosch MA Eur Radiol; 2014 Mar; 24(3):603-9. PubMed ID: 24078055 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The significance of malignancies incidental to microcalcifications in breast spot localization biopsy specimens. Rosenfeld I; Tartter PI; Gajdos C; Hermann G; Bleiweiss I Am J Surg; 2001 Jul; 182(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 11532405 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Reliability and validity of needle biopsy evaluation of breast-abnormalities using the B-categorization--design and objectives of the Diagnosis Optimisation Study (DIOS). Kluttig A; Trocchi P; Heinig A; Holzhausen HJ; Taege C; Hauptmann S; Boecker W; Decker T; Loening T; Schmidt-Pokrzywniak A; Thomssen C; Lantzsch T; Buchmann J; Stang A BMC Cancer; 2007 Jun; 7():100. PubMed ID: 17570833 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Magnetic resonance mammography in small vs. advanced breast lesions - systematic comparison reveals significant impact of lesion size on diagnostic accuracy in 936 histologically verified breast lesions. Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Vag T; Gröschel T; Richter C; Burmeister H; Kaiser WA Rofo; 2011 Feb; 183(2):126-35. PubMed ID: 20830650 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Breast lesion localization: a freehand, interactive MR imaging-guided technique. Daniel BL; Birdwell RL; Ikeda DM; Jeffrey SS; Black JW; Block WF; Sawyer-Glover AM; Glover GH; Herfkens RJ Radiology; 1998 May; 207(2):455-63. PubMed ID: 9577495 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Modified Core Wash Cytology: A reliable same day biopsy result for breast clinics. Bulte JP; Wauters CA; Duijm LE; de Wilt JH; Strobbe LJ Eur J Surg Oncol; 2016 Dec; 42(12):1821-1826. PubMed ID: 27450639 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography. Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Low-field versus high-field MRI in diagnosing breast disorders. Pääkkö E; Reinikainen H; Lindholm EL; Rissanen T Eur Radiol; 2005 Jul; 15(7):1361-8. PubMed ID: 15711841 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. CE-Magnetic Resonance Mammography for the evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed breast cancer. Pediconi F; Venditti F; Padula S; Roselli A; Moriconi E; Giacomelli L; Catalano C; Passariello R Radiol Med; 2005; 110(1-2):61-8. PubMed ID: 16163140 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]