105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19954911)
1. Value of ductal obstruction sign in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions at MR imaging.
Baltzer PA; Kaiser CG; Dietzel M; Vag T; Herzog AB; Gajda M; Camara O; Kaiser WA
Eur J Radiol; 2010 Aug; 75(2):e18-21. PubMed ID: 19954911
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Differential diagnosis of breast lesions 5 mm or less: is there a role for magnetic resonance imaging?
Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Vag T; Gröschel T; Gajda M; Camara O; Kaiser WA
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2010; 34(3):456-64. PubMed ID: 20498554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The necrosis sign in magnetic resonance-mammography: diagnostic accuracy in 1,084 histologically verified breast lesions.
Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Vag T; Herzog A; Gajda M; Camara O; Kaiser WA
Breast J; 2010; 16(6):603-8. PubMed ID: 21070437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Ductal lavage findings in women with known breast cancer undergoing mastectomy.
Khan SA; Wiley EL; Rodriguez N; Baird C; Ramakrishnan R; Nayar R; Bryk M; Bethke KB; Staradub VL; Wolfman J; Rademaker A; Ljung BM; Morrow M
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Oct; 96(20):1510-7. PubMed ID: 15494601
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. MR ductography: comparison with conventional ductography as a diagnostic method in patients with nipple discharge.
Hirose M; Nobusawa H; Gokan T
Radiographics; 2007 Oct; 27 Suppl 1():S183-96. PubMed ID: 18180226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [MR-mammography: current status and perspectives].
Funke M; Fischer U; Grabbe E
Aktuelle Radiol; 1996 May; 6(3):130-5. PubMed ID: 8679736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. MR imaging in probably benign lesions (BI-RADS category 3) of the breast.
Gökalp G; Topal U
Eur J Radiol; 2006 Mar; 57(3):436-44. PubMed ID: 16316732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Characterization of breast lesions with CE-MR multimodal morphological and kinetic analysis: comparison with conventional mammography and high-resolution ultrasound.
Vassiou K; Kanavou T; Vlychou M; Poultsidi A; Athanasiou E; Arvanitis DL; Fezoulidis IV
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Apr; 70(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 18295425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Appropriate imaging work-up of palpable breast masses. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria.
Evans WP; Mendelson E; Bassett L; Böhm-Vélez M; Cardenosa G; D'Orsi C; Monsees B; Thurmond A; Goldstein S
Radiology; 2000 Jun; 215 Suppl():961-4. PubMed ID: 11037523
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience in high-risk women.
Liberman L; Morris EA; Benton CL; Abramson AF; Dershaw DD
Cancer; 2003 Jul; 98(2):377-88. PubMed ID: 12872360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Concepts for differential diagnosis in breast MR imaging.
Kuhl CK
Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am; 2006 Aug; 14(3):305-28, v. PubMed ID: 17098173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The value of clinical characteristics and breast-imaging studies in predicting a histopathologic diagnosis of cancer or high-risk lesion in patients with spontaneous nipple discharge.
Adepoju LJ; Chun J; El-Tamer M; Ditkoff BA; Schnabel F; Joseph KA
Am J Surg; 2005 Oct; 190(4):644-6. PubMed ID: 16164940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The challenge of imaging dense breast parenchyma: is magnetic resonance mammography the technique of choice? A comparative study with x-ray mammography and whole-breast ultrasound.
Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Dominelli V; Cagioli S; Karatasiou A; Pronio A; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
Invest Radiol; 2009 Jul; 44(7):412-21. PubMed ID: 19448554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [MR mammography at 0.5 tesla. I. Comparison of image quality and sensitivity of MR mammography at 0.5 and 1.5 T].
Kuhl CK; Kreft BP; Hauswirth A; Elevelt A; Steudel A; Reiser M; Schild HH
Rofo; 1995 May; 162(5):381-9. PubMed ID: 7772759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. MR elastography of the breast:preliminary clinical results.
Lorenzen J; Sinkus R; Lorenzen M; Dargatz M; Leussler C; Röschmann P; Adam G
Rofo; 2002 Jul; 174(7):830-4. PubMed ID: 12101471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Sensitivity and specificity of unilateral edema on T2w-TSE sequences in MR-Mammography considering 974 histologically verified lesions.
Baltzer PA; Yang F; Dietzel M; Herzog A; Simon A; Vag T; Gajda M; Camara O; Kaiser WA
Breast J; 2010; 16(3):233-9. PubMed ID: 20565468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Complementary role of adjunctive breast magnetic resonance imaging and scintimammography in patients of all ages undergoing breast cancer surgery.
Howarth D; Slater S; Lau P; Booker J; Clark D; Sillar R
Australas Radiol; 2005 Aug; 49(4):289-97. PubMed ID: 16026435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Enhanced mass on contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging: Lesion characterization using combination of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR images.
Yabuuchi H; Matsuo Y; Okafuji T; Kamitani T; Soeda H; Setoguchi T; Sakai S; Hatakenaka M; Kubo M; Sadanaga N; Yamamoto H; Honda H
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Nov; 28(5):1157-65. PubMed ID: 18972357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Present-day diagnostic techniques in breast nodes].
Sovtsov SA; Mikhaĭlova SA
Ter Arkh; 1998; 70(10):42-6. PubMed ID: 9864803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Ductal pattern enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging of the breast due to ductal lavage.
Ghanouni P; Kurian AW; Margolis D; Hartman AR; Mills MA; Plevritis SK; Ford JM; Daniel BL
Breast J; 2007; 13(3):281-6. PubMed ID: 17461903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
