2283 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15486214)
1. 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]
2. [Diagnostic imaging of lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic, ultrasonographic and MR findings].
Bazzocchi M; Facecchia I; Zuiani C; Puglisi F; Di Loreto C; Smania S
Radiol Med; 2000 Dec; 100(6):436-43. PubMed ID: 11307504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Multicentric and multifocal cancer: whole-breast US in preoperative evaluation.
Berg WA; Gilbreath PL
Radiology; 2000 Jan; 214(1):59-66. PubMed ID: 10644102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral breast cancers: bilateral whole-breast US in the preoperative evaluation of patients.
Moon WK; Noh DY; Im JG
Radiology; 2002 Aug; 224(2):569-76. PubMed ID: 12147858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Three-dimensional RODEO breast MR imaging of lesions containing ductal carcinoma in situ.
Soderstrom CE; Harms SE; Copit DS; Evans WP; Savino DA; Krakos PA; Farrell RS; Flamig DP
Radiology; 1996 Nov; 201(2):427-32. PubMed ID: 8888235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Preoperative MRT of the breast in invasive lobular carcinoma in comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma].
Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Beljavskaja M; Bick U; Taupitz M; Blohmer JU; Winzer KJ; Hamm B
Rofo; 2004 Apr; 176(4):544-9. PubMed ID: 15088179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK
Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Non-calcified ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: comparison of diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis, digital mammography, and ultrasonography.
Su X; Lin Q; Cui C; Xu W; Wei Z; Fei J; Li L
Breast Cancer; 2017 Jul; 24(4):562-570. PubMed ID: 27837442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging, multidetector row computed tomography, ultrasonography, and mammography for tumor extension of breast cancer.
Uematsu T; Yuen S; Kasami M; Uchida Y
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2008 Dec; 112(3):461-74. PubMed ID: 18193352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent.
Boetes C; Mus RD; Holland R; Barentsz JO; Strijk SP; Wobbes T; Hendriks JH; Ruys SH
Radiology; 1995 Dec; 197(3):743-7. PubMed ID: 7480749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Ductal carcinoma in situ: is there a role for MRI?
Zuiani C; Francescutti GE; Londero V; Zunnui I; Bazzocchi M
J Exp Clin Cancer Res; 2002 Sep; 21(3 Suppl):89-95. PubMed ID: 12585661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Multifocal, multicentric and contralateral breast cancers: breast MR imaging in the preoperative evaluation of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Girardi V; Carbognin G; Camera L; Baglio I; Bucci A; Bonetti F; Mucelli RP
Radiol Med; 2011 Dec; 116(8):1226-38. PubMed ID: 21744256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mammography and ultrasound in the diagnosis of contralateral breast cancer.
Rissanen TJ; Mäkäräinen HP; Apaja-Sarkkinen MA; Lindholm EL
Acta Radiol; 1995 Jul; 36(4):358-66. PubMed ID: 7619612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Sensitivity of imaging for multifocal-multicentric breast carcinoma.
Bozzini A; Renne G; Meneghetti L; Bandi G; Santos G; Vento AR; Menna S; Andrighetto S; Viale G; Cassano E; Bellomi M
BMC Cancer; 2008 Sep; 8():275. PubMed ID: 18826585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: a comparative study with mammography and ultrasonography.
Hata T; Takahashi H; Watanabe K; Takahashi M; Taguchi K; Itoh T; Todo S
J Am Coll Surg; 2004 Feb; 198(2):190-7. PubMed ID: 14759774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. The effectiveness of MR imaging in the assessment of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast.
Mann RM
Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am; 2010 May; 18(2):259-76, ix. PubMed ID: 20494311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Detection of invasive breast lobular carcinoma by image analysis: comparison between mammography and ultrasound].
López-Narváez RA; Garza-Montemayor ML; Garza-García NL; Ojeda-Mendez EE; Rangel-Nava H; Méndez-Lozano D; Morales-Caballero FG
Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2012 May; 80(5):320-6. PubMed ID: 23301423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging.
Menell JH; Morris EA; Dershaw DD; Abramson AF; Brogi E; Liberman L
Breast J; 2005; 11(6):382-90. PubMed ID: 16297080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach.
Fischer U; Kopka L; Grabbe E
Radiology; 1999 Dec; 213(3):881-8. PubMed ID: 10580970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
