150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17992390)
1. Presumed prevalence analysis on suspected and highly suspected breast cancer lesions in São Paulo using BIRADS criteria.
Milani V; Goldman SM; Finguerman F; Pinotti M; Ribeiro CS; Abdalla N; Szejnfeld J
Sao Paulo Med J; 2007 Jul; 125(4):210-4. PubMed ID: 17992390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Early results of breast cancer screening research].
Nowicki A; Stogowska I
Ginekol Pol; 2007 Jun; 78(6):464-70. PubMed ID: 17899703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Mammography performance in Oman: Review of factors influencing cancer yield and positive predictive value.
Taif S; Tufail F; Alnuaimi AS
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol; 2016 Jun; 12(2):e250-8. PubMed ID: 24673798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. BIRADS classification in mammography.
Balleyguier C; Ayadi S; Van Nguyen K; Vanel D; Dromain C; Sigal R
Eur J Radiol; 2007 Feb; 61(2):192-4. PubMed ID: 17164080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. BIRADS mammography: exercises.
Balleyguier C; Bidault F; Mathieu MC; Ayadi S; Couanet D; Sigal R
Eur J Radiol; 2007 Feb; 61(2):195-201. PubMed ID: 17161933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Spatio-temporal trend of BIRADS classification suggestive of malignancy: a national analysis of mammograms, 2013-2017.
Navarro-Ruíz NE; Reyna-Sevilla A
Gac Med Mex; 2021; 157(2):167-173. PubMed ID: 34270528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Scintimammography with 99mTC-MIBI in the clinical practice: repercussion on the clinical management of the patient].
Prats E; Razola P; Sainz JM; Tardín L; Andrés A; Abós MD; García F; Fernández J; Villavieja L; Banzo J
Rev Esp Med Nucl; 2007; 26(3):153-9. PubMed ID: 17524309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Predictive value of breast imaging report and database system (BIRADS) to detect cancer in a reference regional hospital].
Bellolio E; Pineda V; Burgos ME; Iriarte MJ; Becker R; Araya JC; Villaseca M; Mardones N
Rev Med Chil; 2015 Dec; 143(12):1533-8. PubMed ID: 26928614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Mammographic and ultrasonographic BIRADS classification and its correlation with histopathologic findings].
Acosta-Martínez M; Karchmer-Krivitzky S; Melgar-Barriga G; Molinar-Horcasitas ML; Garza-Arrieta J
Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2016 Mar; 84(3):136-42. PubMed ID: 27424439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Costs of mammogram campaigns in the Regional Health Division of Marília, São Paulo State, Brazil, 2005-2006].
Marconato RR; Soárez PC; Ciconelli RM
Cad Saude Publica; 2011 Aug; 27(8):1529-36. PubMed ID: 21877001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cancer Yield and Patterns of Follow-up for BI-RADS Category 3 after Screening Mammography Recall in the National Mammography Database.
Berg WA; Berg JM; Sickles EA; Burnside ES; Zuley ML; Rosenberg RD; Lee CS
Radiology; 2020 Jul; 296(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 32427557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Audit of mammography requests in Abakaliki, South-East Nigeria.
Eni UE; Ekwedigwe KC; Sunday-Adeoye I; Daniyan A; Isikhuemen ME
World J Surg Oncol; 2017 Mar; 15(1):56. PubMed ID: 28270153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Diagnostic Value of Frozen Section in Patients with Non-Palpable Breast Lesions.
Abuoglu HH; Günay E; Sunamak O; Yiğitbaşı MR;
Chirurgia (Bucur); 2016; 111(6):500-504. PubMed ID: 28044952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. BIRADS ultrasonography.
Levy L; Suissa M; Chiche JF; Teman G; Martin B
Eur J Radiol; 2007 Feb; 61(2):202-11. PubMed ID: 17215097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Improved Performance of Adjunctive Ultrasonography After Mammography Screening for Breast Cancer Among Chinese Females.
Dong H; Huang Y; Song F; Dai H; Liu P; Zhu Y; Wang P; Han J; Hao X; Chen K
Clin Breast Cancer; 2018 Jun; 18(3):e353-e361. PubMed ID: 28887010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Analysing the Insights and Assessing the Impact of a Digital Mammography and Tomosynthesis Based 2-year Long Prospective Breast Screening Programme Organised in Western India.
Ajmera P; Yadav P; Dosi U; Goyal S
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2022 Jan; 23(1):327-338. PubMed ID: 35092402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Mammographic assessment of a geographically defined population at a mastology referral hospital in São Paulo Brazil.
Caetano S; Junior JM; Finguerman F; Goldman SM; Szejnfeld J
PLoS One; 2013; 8(9):e74270. PubMed ID: 24066130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Preventive practices of cancer screening in women: comparison of estimates from ISA--Capital survey and the telephone-based Surveillance of Risk and Protective Factors for Chronic Diseases (VIGITEL--São Paulo).
Segri NJ; Francisco PM; Alves MC; Barros MB; Cesar CL; Goldbaum M; Malta DC
Rev Bras Epidemiol; 2011 Sep; 14 Suppl 1():31-43. PubMed ID: 22002140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Automated Breast Density Computation in Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Influence on Mean Glandular Dose and BIRADS Density Categorization.
Castillo-García M; Chevalier M; Garayoa J; Rodriguez-Ruiz A; García-Pinto D; Valverde J
Acad Radiol; 2017 Jul; 24(7):802-810. PubMed ID: 28214227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The adjunctive digital breast tomosynthesis in diagnosis of breast cancer.
Yang TL; Liang HL; Chou CP; Huang JS; Pan HB
Biomed Res Int; 2013; 2013():597253. PubMed ID: 23844366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
