169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20868610)
1. [Sonographic features of breast imaging reporting and data system assessment category 4 and 5 non-palpable breast lesions].
Zhu QL; Jiang YX; Zhang J; Dai Q; Sun Q
Zhongguo Yi Xue Ke Xue Yuan Xue Bao; 2010 Aug; 32(4):456-60. PubMed ID: 20868610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Does power Doppler ultrasonography improve the BI-RADS category assessment and diagnostic accuracy of solid breast lesions?
Tozaki M; Fukuma E
Acta Radiol; 2011 Sep; 52(7):706-10. PubMed ID: 21596798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Observer variability of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) for breast ultrasound.
Lee HJ; Kim EK; Kim MJ; Youk JH; Lee JY; Kang DR; Oh KK
Eur J Radiol; 2008 Feb; 65(2):293-8. PubMed ID: 17531417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Nonpalpable BI-RADS 4 breast lesions: sonographic findings and pathology correlation.
Elverici E; Barça AN; Aktaş H; Özsoy A; Zengin B; Çavuşoğlu M; Araz L
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2015; 21(3):189-94. PubMed ID: 25835079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Sonographic features of histopathologically benign solid breast lesions that have been classified as BI-RADS 4 on sonography.
Taskin F; Koseoglu K; Ozbas S; Erkus M; Karaman C
J Clin Ultrasound; 2012 Jun; 40(5):261-5. PubMed ID: 22508447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. BI-RADS for sonography: positive and negative predictive values of sonographic features.
Hong AS; Rosen EL; Soo MS; Baker JA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2005 Apr; 184(4):1260-5. PubMed ID: 15788607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy and Efficiency of Categories 4 and 5 of the Second Edition of the BI-RADS Ultrasound Lexicon in Diagnosing Breast Lesions.
Zou X; Wang J; Lan X; Lin Q; Han F; Liu L; Li A
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2016 Sep; 42(9):2065-71. PubMed ID: 27262521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Accuracy of classification of breast ultrasound findings based on criteria used for BI-RADS.
Heinig J; Witteler R; Schmitz R; Kiesel L; Steinhard J
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Sep; 32(4):573-8. PubMed ID: 18421795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Risk of malignancy in palpable solid breast masses considered probably benign or low suspicion: implications for management.
Giess CS; Smeglin LZ; Meyer JE; Ritner JA; Birdwell RL
J Ultrasound Med; 2012 Dec; 31(12):1943-9. PubMed ID: 23197547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Impact of lesion size on the detection rate of non-palpable breast malignant lesions.
Jing Z; Yu-xin J; Qing-li Z; He L; Ke L; Qiang S
Zhongguo Yi Xue Ke Xue Yuan Xue Bao; 2011 Apr; 33(2):136-41. PubMed ID: 21529439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Solid breast mass characterisation: use of the sonographic BI-RADS classification.
Costantini M; Belli P; Ierardi C; Franceschini G; La Torre G; Bonomo L
Radiol Med; 2007 Sep; 112(6):877-94. PubMed ID: 17885742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Influence of age on PPV of sonographic BI-RADS categories 3, 4, and 5.
Fu CY; Hsu HH; Yu JC; Hsu GC; Hsu KF; Chan DC; Ku CH; Lu TC; Chu CH
Ultraschall Med; 2011 Jan; 32 Suppl 1():S8-13. PubMed ID: 20603785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Could ultrasonic elastography help the diagnosis of small (≤2 cm) breast cancer with the usage of sonographic BI-RADS classification?
Zhi H; Xiao XY; Ou B; Zhong WJ; Zhao ZZ; Zhao XB; Yang HY; Luo BM
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Nov; 81(11):3216-21. PubMed ID: 22608397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Usefulness of combined BI-RADS analysis and Nakagami statistics of ultrasound echoes in the diagnosis of breast lesions.
Dobruch-Sobczak K; Piotrzkowska-Wróblewska H; Roszkowska-Purska K; Nowicki A; Jakubowski W
Clin Radiol; 2017 Apr; 72(4):339.e7-339.e15. PubMed ID: 28038779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Characterization of solid breast masses: use of the sonographic breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon.
Costantini M; Belli P; Lombardi R; Franceschini G; Mulè A; Bonomo L
J Ultrasound Med; 2006 May; 25(5):649-59; quiz 661. PubMed ID: 16632790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Computer-aided classification of BI-RADS category 3 breast lesions.
Buchbinder SS; Leichter IS; Lederman RB; Novak B; Bamberger PN; Sklair-Levy M; Yarmish G; Fields SI
Radiology; 2004 Mar; 230(3):820-3. PubMed ID: 14739315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Analysis of sonographic features for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast tumors of different sizes.
Chen SC; Cheung YC; Su CH; Chen MF; Hwang TL; Hsueh S
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Feb; 23(2):188-93. PubMed ID: 14770402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Computer aided classification system for breast ultrasound based on Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS).
Shen WC; Chang RF; Moon WK
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2007 Nov; 33(11):1688-98. PubMed ID: 17681678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [The application value of BI-RADS lexicon and high-frequency CDFI scoring in differentiation of benign from malignant lesions of the breast].
Yang M; Liu F; Gu XN; Cai YL; Wang YY; Zhou WJ
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2013 Jun; 93(23):1833-5. PubMed ID: 24124721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical application of the BI-RADS final assessment to breast sonography in conjunction with mammography.
Kim EK; Ko KH; Oh KK; Kwak JY; You JK; Kim MJ; Park BW
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 May; 190(5):1209-15. PubMed ID: 18430833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
