240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15243715)
21. Prevalence and Predictive Value of BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 Lesions Detected on Breast MRI: Correlation with Study Indication.
Chikarmane SA; Tai R; Meyer JE; Giess CS
Acad Radiol; 2017 Apr; 24(4):435-441. PubMed ID: 27955878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS guidelines by community radiologists: concordance of assessments and recommendations assigned to screening mammograms.
Lehman C; Holt S; Peacock S; White E; Urban N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Jul; 179(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 12076896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in screening detected microcalcification lesions of the breast: is there any value?
Uematsu T; Yuen S; Kasami M; Uchida Y
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Jul; 103(3):269-81. PubMed ID: 17063274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Screening Ultrasound in Women with Negative Mammography: Outcome Analysis.
Hwang JY; Han BK; Ko EY; Shin JH; Hahn SY; Nam MY
Yonsei Med J; 2015 Sep; 56(5):1352-8. PubMed ID: 26256979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. [Neddle-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of non-palpable breast cancer].
Becerra-Alcántara GI; Círigo-Villagómez LL; Ramos-Medina F; Robledo-Martínez H; Mar-Merinos CG; Panzi-Altamirano RM
Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2015 Jul; 83(7):400-7. PubMed ID: 26422910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [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]
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. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: detection in dependence of the BI-RADS categories.
Obenauer S; Sohns C; Werner C; Grabbe E
Breast J; 2006; 12(1):16-9. PubMed ID: 16409582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions: value of US in management--follow-up and outcome.
Raza S; Chikarmane SA; Neilsen SS; Zorn LM; Birdwell RL
Radiology; 2008 Sep; 248(3):773-81. PubMed ID: 18647850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions.
Varas X; Leborgne JH; Leborgne F; Mezzera J; Jaumandreu S; Leborgne F
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Sep; 179(3):691-5. PubMed ID: 12185047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) in the Dutch breast cancer screening programme: its role as an assessment and stratification tool.
Timmers JM; van Doorne-Nagtegaal HJ; Zonderland HM; van Tinteren H; Visser O; Verbeek AL; den Heeten GJ; Broeders MJ
Eur Radiol; 2012 Aug; 22(8):1717-23. PubMed ID: 22415412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Usefulness of combined BI-RADS analysis and Nakagami statistics of ultrasound echoes in the diagnosis of breast lesions.
Dobruch-Sobczak K; Piotrzkowska-Wróblewska H; Roszkowska-Purska K; Nowicki A; Jakubowski W
Clin Radiol; 2017 Apr; 72(4):339.e7-339.e15. PubMed ID: 28038779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Use of BI-RADS 3-probably benign category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial.
Baum JK; Hanna LG; Acharyya S; Mahoney MC; Conant EF; Bassett LW; Pisano ED
Radiology; 2011 Jul; 260(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 21502382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Differential Diagnosis of Breast Category 3 and 4 Nodules Through BI-RADS Classification in Conjunction with Shear Wave Elastography.
Wang M; Yang Z; Liu C; Yan J; Zhang W; Sun J; Cui G
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2017 Mar; 43(3):601-606. PubMed ID: 27988221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Screening breast MR imaging: comparison of interpretation of baseline and annual follow-up studies.
Abramovici G; Mainiero MB
Radiology; 2011 Apr; 259(1):85-91. PubMed ID: 21285337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Positive predictive value of BI-RADS MR imaging.
Mahoney MC; Gatsonis C; Hanna L; DeMartini WB; Lehman C
Radiology; 2012 Jul; 264(1):51-8. PubMed ID: 22589320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Influence of age on PPV of sonographic BI-RADS categories 3, 4, and 5.
Fu CY; Hsu HH; Yu JC; Hsu GC; Hsu KF; Chan DC; Ku CH; Lu TC; Chu CH
Ultraschall Med; 2011 Jan; 32 Suppl 1():S8-13. PubMed ID: 20603785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with BI-RADS 3-5 microcalcifications.
Cilotti A; Iacconi C; Marini C; Moretti M; Mazzotta D; Traino C; Naccarato AG; Piagneri V; Giaconi C; Bevilacqua G; Bartolozzi C
Radiol Med; 2007 Mar; 112(2):272-86. PubMed ID: 17361370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Melnikow J; Fenton JJ; Whitlock EP; Miglioretti DL; Weyrich MS; Thompson JH; Shah K
Ann Intern Med; 2016 Feb; 164(4):268-78. PubMed ID: 26757021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Utility of BI-RADS Assessment Category 4 Subdivisions for Screening Breast MRI.
Strigel RM; Burnside ES; Elezaby M; Fowler AM; Kelcz F; Salkowski LR; DeMartini WB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jun; 208(6):1392-1399. PubMed ID: 28792802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
