BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20103433)

  • 1. Comparison of a unidirectional panoramic 3D endoluminal interpretation technique to traditional 2D and bidirectional 3D interpretation techniques at CT colonography: preliminary observations.
    Lenhart DK; Babb J; Bonavita J; Kim D; Bini EJ; Megibow AJ; Macari M
    Clin Radiol; 2010 Feb; 65(2):118-25. PubMed ID: 20103433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Polyp detection with CT colonography: primary 3D endoluminal analysis versus primary 2D transverse analysis with computer-assisted reader software.
    Taylor SA; Halligan S; Slater A; Goh V; Burling DN; Roddie ME; Honeyfield L; McQuillan J; Amin H; Dehmeshki J
    Radiology; 2006 Jun; 239(3):759-67. PubMed ID: 16543593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Primary three-dimensional analysis with perspective-filet view versus primary two-dimensional analysis: evaluation of lesion detection by inexperienced readers at computed tomographic colonography in symptomatic patients.
    Fisichella VA; Jäderling F; Horvath S; Stotzer PO; Kilander A; Hellström M
    Acta Radiol; 2009 Apr; 50(3):244-55. PubMed ID: 19235581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Primary 2D versus primary 3D polyp detection at screening CT colonography.
    Pickhardt PJ; Lee AD; Taylor AJ; Michel SJ; Winter TC; Shadid A; Meiners RJ; Chase PJ; Hinshaw JL; Williams JG; Prout TM; Husain SH; Kim DH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Dec; 189(6):1451-6. PubMed ID: 18029884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Linear polyp measurement at CT colonography: in vitro and in vivo comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional displays.
    Pickhardt PJ; Lee AD; McFarland EG; Taylor AJ
    Radiology; 2005 Sep; 236(3):872-8. PubMed ID: 16118167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Polyp measurement with CT colonography: multiple-reader, multiple-workstation comparison.
    Young BM; Fletcher JG; Paulsen SR; Booya F; Johnson CD; Johnson KT; Melton Z; Rodysill D; Mandrekar J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Jan; 188(1):122-9. PubMed ID: 17179354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Computer-aided detection (CAD) as a second reader using perspective filet view at CT colonography: effect on performance of inexperienced readers.
    Fisichella VA; Jäderling F; Horvath S; Stotzer PO; Kilander A; Båth M; Hellström M
    Clin Radiol; 2009 Oct; 64(10):972-82. PubMed ID: 19748002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of accuracy and time-efficiency of CT colonography between conventional and panoramic 3D interpretation methods: an anthropomorphic phantom study.
    Choi JI; Kim SH; Kim SH; Park HS; Lee JM; Lee JY; Han JK; Choi BI
    Eur J Radiol; 2011 Nov; 80(2):e68-75. PubMed ID: 20875938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Polyp detection at 3-dimensional endoluminal computed tomography colonography: sensitivity of one-way fly-through at 120 degrees field-of-view angle.
    Pickhardt PJ; Schumacher C; Kim DH
    J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2009; 33(4):631-5. PubMed ID: 19638863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [CT colonography: evaluation of two 3D algorithms in a screening population].
    Juchems MS; Ernst AS; Sheafor DH; Carrascosa P; Virmany S; Brambs HJ; Aschoff AJ
    Rofo; 2009 Jun; 181(6):573-8. PubMed ID: 19440949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. CT colonography: influence of 3D viewing and polyp candidate features on interpretation with computer-aided detection.
    Shi R; Schraedley-Desmond P; Napel S; Olcott EW; Jeffrey RB; Yee J; Zalis ME; Margolis D; Paik DS; Sherbondy AJ; Sundaram P; Beaulieu CF
    Radiology; 2006 Jun; 239(3):768-76. PubMed ID: 16714460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. CT colonography: automated measurement of colonic polyps compared with manual techniques--human in vitro study.
    Taylor SA; Slater A; Halligan S; Honeyfield L; Roddie ME; Demeshski J; Amin H; Burling D
    Radiology; 2007 Jan; 242(1):120-8. PubMed ID: 17105850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Two- versus three-dimensional colon evaluation with recently developed virtual dissection software for CT colonography.
    Kim SH; Lee JM; Eun HW; Lee MW; Han JK; Lee JY; Choi BI
    Radiology; 2007 Sep; 244(3):852-64. PubMed ID: 17709833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Polyp detection at CT colonography: inadequate primary 3D endoluminal reference standard precludes meaningful comparison.
    Pickhardt PJ
    Radiology; 2007 Jul; 244(1):316-7. PubMed ID: 17581913
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessment of two 3D MDCT colonography protocols for observation of colorectal polyps.
    Yasumoto T; Murakami T; Yamamoto H; Hori M; Iannaccone R; Kim T; Abe H; Kuwabara M; Yamasaki K; Kikkawa N; Arimoto H; Passariello R; Nakamura H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Jan; 186(1):85-9. PubMed ID: 16357383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. CT colonography: accuracy of initial interpretation by radiographers in routine clinical practice.
    Burling D; Wylie P; Gupta A; Illangovan R; Muckian J; Ahmad R; Marshall M; Taylor SA
    Clin Radiol; 2010 Feb; 65(2):126-32. PubMed ID: 20103434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of axial, coronal, and primary 3D review in MDCT colonography for the detection of small polyps: a phantom study.
    Mang T; Schaefer-Prokop C; Schima W; Maier A; Schober E; Mueller-Mang C; Weber M; Prokop M
    Eur J Radiol; 2009 Apr; 70(1):86-93. PubMed ID: 18221849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A feasibility study of unidirectional 240°-angle 3D CT colonography.
    Oh SN; Lee YJ; Kim YS; Jung SE; Rha SE; Shin YR; Byun JY; Choi BG
    Clin Imaging; 2012; 36(5):553-8. PubMed ID: 22920361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of primary two- and three-dimensional methods to review CT colonography.
    van Gelder RE; Florie J; Nio CY; Jensch S; de Jager SW; Vos FM; Venema HW; Bartelsman JF; Reitsma JB; Bossuyt PM; Laméris JS; Stoker J
    Eur Radiol; 2007 May; 17(5):1181-92. PubMed ID: 17119975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. CT colonography with computer-aided detection as a second reader: observer performance study.
    Petrick N; Haider M; Summers RM; Yeshwant SC; Brown L; Iuliano EM; Louie A; Choi JR; Pickhardt PJ
    Radiology; 2008 Jan; 246(1):148-56. PubMed ID: 18096536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.