708 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21596798)
21. Assessment of Ultrasound Features and BI-RADS Categories of Malignant Breast Masses in Women ≤40.
Gity M; Jafari M; Olfatbakhsh A; Rezaei Kalantari K; Hashemi E; Sari F
Arch Iran Med; 2021 May; 24(5):383-389. PubMed ID: 34196203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Simple rules for ultrasonographic subcategorization of BI-RADS®-US 4 breast masses.
Jales RM; Sarian LO; Torresan R; Marussi EF; Alvares BR; Derchain S
Eur J Radiol; 2013 Aug; 82(8):1231-5. PubMed ID: 23540948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A Pivotal Study of Optoacoustic Imaging to Diagnose Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists.
Neuschler EI; Butler R; Young CA; Barke LD; Bertrand ML; Böhm-Vélez M; Destounis S; Donlan P; Grobmyer SR; Katzen J; Kist KA; Lavin PT; Makariou EV; Parris TM; Schilling KJ; Tucker FL; Dogan BE
Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):398-412. PubMed ID: 29178816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [The value of ultrasound classification in BI-RADS category 4 of breast complex cystic masses].
Yao JP; Niu LJ; Wang Y; Geng CY; Chang Q; Chen Y; Zhu L
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2018 Sep; 40(9):672-675. PubMed ID: 30293391
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with BI-RADS 3-5 microcalcifications.
Cilotti A; Iacconi C; Marini C; Moretti M; Mazzotta D; Traino C; Naccarato AG; Piagneri V; Giaconi C; Bevilacqua G; Bartolozzi C
Radiol Med; 2007 Mar; 112(2):272-86. PubMed ID: 17361370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41.
Hooley RJ; Greenberg KL; Stackhouse RM; Geisel JL; Butler RS; Philpotts LE
Radiology; 2012 Oct; 265(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 22723501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. 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]
29. Diffusion-weighted imaging (b value = 1500 s/mm(2)) is useful to decrease false-positive breast cancer cases due to fibrocystic changes.
Ochi M; Kuroiwa T; Sunami S; Murakami J; Miyahara S; Nagaie T; Oya M; Yabuuchi H; Hatakenaka M
Breast Cancer; 2013 Apr; 20(2):137-44. PubMed ID: 22161277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Diagnostic value of breast ultrasound in mammography BI-RADS 0 and clinically indeterminate or suspicious of malignancy breast lesions.
Dobrosavljević A; Rakić S; Nikoli B; Raznatović SJ; Dikić SD; Milosević Z; Jurisić A; Skrobić M
Vojnosanit Pregl; 2016 Mar; 73(3):239-45. PubMed ID: 27295907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. Additional diagnostic value of shear-wave elastography and color Doppler US for evaluation of breast non-mass lesions detected at B-mode US.
Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Ko ES; Shin JH; Kim GR
Eur Radiol; 2016 Oct; 26(10):3542-9. PubMed ID: 26787603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Ultrasound positive predictive values by BI-RADS categories 3-5 for solid masses: An independent reader study.
Stavros AT; Freitas AG; deMello GGN; Barke L; McDonald D; Kaske T; Wolverton D; Honick A; Stanzani D; Padovan AH; Moura APC; de Campos MCV
Eur Radiol; 2017 Oct; 27(10):4307-4315. PubMed ID: 28396996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Ultrasound Elastography Combined With BI-RADS-US Classification System: Is It Helpful for the Diagnostic Performance of Conventional Ultrasonography?
Hao SY; Jiang QC; Zhong WJ; Zhao XB; Yao JY; Li LJ; Luo BM; Ou B; Zhi H
Clin Breast Cancer; 2016 Jun; 16(3):e33-41. PubMed ID: 26639065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Value of the US BI-RADS final assessment following mastectomy: BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions.
Gweon HM; Son EJ; Youk JH; Kim JA; Chung J
Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):255-60. PubMed ID: 22302210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Probably benign lesions at screening breast US in a population with elevated risk: prevalence and rate of malignancy in the ACRIN 6666 trial.
Barr RG; Zhang Z; Cormack JB; Mendelson EB; Berg WA
Radiology; 2013 Dec; 269(3):701-12. PubMed ID: 23962417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. Scoring system based on BI-RADS lexicon to predict probability of malignancy in suspicious microcalcifications.
Youk JH; Son EJ; Kim JA; Moon HJ; Kim MJ; Choi CH; Kim EK
Ann Surg Oncol; 2012 May; 19(5):1491-8. PubMed ID: 22173328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions: value of US in management--follow-up and outcome.
Raza S; Chikarmane SA; Neilsen SS; Zorn LM; Birdwell RL
Radiology; 2008 Sep; 248(3):773-81. PubMed ID: 18647850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Added value of shear-wave elastography for evaluation of breast masses detected with screening US imaging.
Lee SH; Chang JM; Kim WH; Bae MS; Seo M; Koo HR; Chu AJ; Gweon HM; Cho N; Moon WK
Radiology; 2014 Oct; 273(1):61-9. PubMed ID: 24955927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
