270 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21158312)
21. Comparison of the Detection Rate of Simulated Microcalcifications in Full-Field Digital Mammography, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, and Synthetically Reconstructed 2-Dimensional Images Performed With 2 Different Digital X-ray Mammography Systems.
Peters S; Hellmich M; Stork A; Kemper J; Grinstein O; Püsken M; Stahlhut L; Kinner S; Maintz D; Krug KB
Invest Radiol; 2017 Apr; 52(4):206-215. PubMed ID: 27861206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison study of reconstruction algorithms for prototype digital breast tomosynthesis using various breast phantoms.
Kim YS; Park HS; Lee HH; Choi YW; Choi JG; Kim HH; Kim HJ
Radiol Med; 2016 Feb; 121(2):81-92. PubMed ID: 26383027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Segmented separable footprint projector for digital breast tomosynthesis and its application for subpixel reconstruction.
Zheng J; Fessler JA; Chan HP
Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 44(3):986-1001. PubMed ID: 28058719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Importance of point-by-point back projection correction for isocentric motion in digital breast tomosynthesis: relevance to morphology of structures such as microcalcifications.
Chen Y; Lo JY; Dobbins JT
Med Phys; 2007 Oct; 34(10):3885-92. PubMed ID: 17985634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Model-based deep CNN-regularized reconstruction for digital breast tomosynthesis with a task-based CNN image assessment approach.
Gao M; Fessler JA; Chan HP
Phys Med Biol; 2023 Dec; 68(24):. PubMed ID: 37988758
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Optimization of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) acquisition parameters for human observers: effect of reconstruction algorithms.
Zeng R; Badano A; Myers KJ
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Apr; 62(7):2598-2611. PubMed ID: 28151728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Analysis of computer-aided detection techniques and signal characteristics for clustered microcalcifications on digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Samala RK; Chan HP; Hadjiiski LM; Helvie MA
Phys Med Biol; 2016 Oct; 61(19):7092-7112. PubMed ID: 27648708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Impact of total variation minimization in volume rendering visualization of breast tomosynthesis data.
Mota AM; Clarkson MJ; Almeida P; Peralta L; Matela N
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2020 Oct; 195():105534. PubMed ID: 32480190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. An object-oriented simulator for 3D digital breast tomosynthesis imaging system.
Seyyedi S; Cengiz K; Kamasak M; Yildirim I
Comput Math Methods Med; 2013; 2013():250689. PubMed ID: 24371468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Assessment of imaging performance of digital breast tomosynthesis based on systematic simulation].
Deng Y; Zhu M; Li S; Wang Y; Gao Y; Ma J
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao; 2021 Jun; 41(6):898-908. PubMed ID: 34238743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Digital breast tomosynthesis image reconstruction using 2D and 3D total variation minimization.
Ertas M; Yildirim I; Kamasak M; Akan A
Biomed Eng Online; 2013 Oct; 12():112. PubMed ID: 24172584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Simultaneous correction of sensitivity and spatial resolution in projection-based magnetic particle imaging.
Murase K
Med Phys; 2020 Apr; 47(4):1845-1859. PubMed ID: 32003025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Performance of Photon-Counting Breast Computed Tomography, Digital Mammography, and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Evaluating Breast Specimens.
Rößler AC; Kalender W; Kolditz D; Steiding C; Ruth V; Preuss C; Peter SC; Brehm B; Hammon M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E
Acad Radiol; 2017 Feb; 24(2):184-190. PubMed ID: 27888024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evaluation of a variable dose acquisition technique for microcalcification and mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis.
Das M; Gifford HC; O'Connor JM; Glick SJ
Med Phys; 2009 Jun; 36(6):1976-84. PubMed ID: 19610286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Technical evaluation of image quality in synthetic mammograms obtained from 15° and 40° digital breast tomosynthesis in a commercial system: a quantitative comparison.
Barca P; Lamastra R; Tucciariello RM; Traino A; Marini C; Aringhieri G; Caramella D; Fantacci ME
Phys Eng Sci Med; 2021 Mar; 44(1):23-35. PubMed ID: 33226534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Observation of super-resolution in digital breast tomosynthesis.
Acciavatti RJ; Maidment AD
Med Phys; 2012 Dec; 39(12):7518-39. PubMed ID: 23231301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. A novel approach to digital breast tomosynthesis for simultaneous acquisition of 2D and 3D images.
Vecchio S; Albanese A; Vignoli P; Taibi A
Eur Radiol; 2011 Jun; 21(6):1207-13. PubMed ID: 21193910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Optimization of the key imaging parameters for detection of microcalcifications in a newly developed digital breast tomosynthesis system.
Park HS; Kim YS; Kim HJ; Choi JG; Choi YW
Clin Imaging; 2013; 37(6):993-9. PubMed ID: 23891226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Enhanced imaging of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis through improved image-reconstruction algorithms.
Sidky EY; Pan X; Reiser IS; Nishikawa RM; Moore RH; Kopans DB
Med Phys; 2009 Nov; 36(11):4920-32. PubMed ID: 19994501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance of clustered microcalcification detection on breast phantom images acquired with an experimental system using variable scan angles, angular increments, and number of projection views.
Chan HP; Goodsitt MM; Helvie MA; Zelakiewicz S; Schmitz A; Noroozian M; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA; Nees AV; Neal CH; Carson P; Lu Y; Hadjiiski L; Wei J
Radiology; 2014 Dec; 273(3):675-85. PubMed ID: 25007048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
