288 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18790584)
1. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
Dromain C; Balleyguier C; Adler G; Garbay JR; Delaloge S
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Jan; 69(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 18790584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
Francescone MA; Jochelson MS; Dershaw DD; Sung JS; Hughes MC; Zheng J; Moskowitz C; Morris EA
Eur J Radiol; 2014 Aug; 83(8):1350-5. PubMed ID: 24932846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part I. Single-energy imaging.
Hill ML; Mainprize JG; Carton AK; Muller S; Ebrahimi M; Jong RA; Dromain C; Yaffe MJ
Med Phys; 2013 May; 40(5):051910. PubMed ID: 23635280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Digital breast tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography alone and in combination compared to 2D digital synthetized mammography and MR imaging in breast cancer detection and classification.
Petrillo A; Fusco R; Vallone P; Filice S; Granata V; Petrosino T; Rosaria Rubulotta M; Setola SV; Mattace Raso M; Maio F; Raiano C; Siani C; Di Bonito M; Botti G
Breast J; 2020 May; 26(5):860-872. PubMed ID: 31886607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Contrast enhanced dual energy spectral mammogram, an emerging addendum in breast imaging.
Kariyappa KD; Gnanaprakasam F; Anand S; Krishnaswami M; Ramachandran M
Br J Radiol; 2016 Nov; 89(1067):20150609. PubMed ID: 27610475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part II. Dual-energy imaging.
Hill ML; Mainprize JG; Carton AK; Saab-Puong S; Iordache R; Muller S; Jong RA; Dromain C; Yaffe MJ
Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081907. PubMed ID: 23927321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results.
Dromain C; Thibault F; Muller S; Rimareix F; Delaloge S; Tardivon A; Balleyguier C
Eur Radiol; 2011 Mar; 21(3):565-74. PubMed ID: 20839001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in breast cancer detection in comparison to tomosynthesis, synthetic 2D mammography and tomosynthesis combined with ultrasound in women with dense breast.
Sudhir R; Sannapareddy K; Potlapalli A; Krishnamurthy PB; Buddha S; Koppula V
Br J Radiol; 2021 Feb; 94(1118):20201046. PubMed ID: 33242249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Analytical optimization of digital subtraction mammography with contrast medium using a commercial unit.
Rosado-Méndez I; Palma BA; Brandan ME
Med Phys; 2008 Dec; 35(12):5544-57. PubMed ID: 19175112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study.
Dromain C; Thibault F; Diekmann F; Fallenberg EM; Jong RA; Koomen M; Hendrick RE; Tardivon A; Toledano A
Breast Cancer Res; 2012 Jun; 14(3):R94. PubMed ID: 22697607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Contrast-enhanced dual-energy mammography: a promising new imaging tool in breast cancer detection.
Lalji U; Lobbes M
Womens Health (Lond); 2014 May; 10(3):289-98. PubMed ID: 24956295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography and contrast enhanced tomosynthesis--Comparison to contrast-enhanced breast MRI.
Chou CP; Lewin JM; Chiang CL; Hung BH; Yang TL; Huang JS; Liao JB; Pan HB
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Dec; 84(12):2501-8. PubMed ID: 26456307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Technique and clinical applications of dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) in breast cancer evaluation: a pictorial essay.
Sudhir R; Koppula V; Mandava A; Kamala S; Potlapalli A
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2021 Jan; 27(1):28-36. PubMed ID: 33252334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM).
Amato F; Bicchierai G; Cirone D; Depretto C; Di Naro F; Vanzi E; Scaperrotta G; Bartolotta TV; Miele V; Nori J
Radiol Med; 2019 Dec; 124(12):1229-1237. PubMed ID: 31773458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of average glandular dose and investigation of the relationship with compressed breast thickness in dual energy contrast enhanced digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Fusco R; Raiano N; Raiano C; Maio F; Vallone P; Mattace Raso M; Setola SV; Granata V; Rubulotta MR; Barretta ML; Petrosino T; Petrillo A
Eur J Radiol; 2020 May; 126():108912. PubMed ID: 32151787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Phantom study to evaluate contrast-medium-enhanced digital subtraction mammography with a full-field indirect-detection system.
Palma BA; Rosado-Méndez I; Villaseñor Y; Brandan ME
Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):577-89. PubMed ID: 20229866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer.
Sung JS; Lebron L; Keating D; D'Alessio D; Comstock CE; Lee CH; Pike MC; Ayhan M; Moskowitz CS; Morris EA; Jochelson MS
Radiology; 2019 Oct; 293(1):81-88. PubMed ID: 31453765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography: Technique, Clinical Applications, and Pitfalls.
Polat DS; Evans WP; Dogan BE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Nov; 215(5):1267-1278. PubMed ID: 32877247
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Generalized subtraction methods in digital mammography.
Taibi A
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Dec; 72(3):447-53. PubMed ID: 18799280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography: A Single-Institution Experience of the First 208 Cases.
Lewis TC; Pizzitola VJ; Giurescu ME; Eversman WG; Lorans R; Robinson KA; Patel BK
Breast J; 2017 Jan; 23(1):67-76. PubMed ID: 27696576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
