These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23083575)

  • 1. Contrast enhanced spectral mammography: better than MRI?
    Thibault F; Balleyguier C; Tardivon A; Dromain C
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S162-4. PubMed ID: 23083575
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Exploiting sparsity in x-f space for higher spatiotemporal resolution in breast dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI.
    Usman M; Ramsay EA; Siegler P; Plewes DB; Chan RW
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S171-3. PubMed ID: 23083578
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Positron emission mammography: better than magnetic resonance mammography?
    Schilling K
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S139-41. PubMed ID: 23083565
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Feature extraction and classification of dynamic contrast-enhanced T2*-weighted breast image data.
    Torheim G; Godtliebsen F; Axelson D; Kvistad KA; Haraldseth O; Rinck PA
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2001 Dec; 20(12):1293-301. PubMed ID: 11811829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography in Comparison to Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Lesions.
    Xing D; Lv Y; Sun B; Xie H; Dong J; Hao C; Chen Q; Chi X
    J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2019; 43(2):245-251. PubMed ID: 30531546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Comparison of full-field digital mammography and magnetic resonance imaging for breast disease diagnosis].
    Wang Q; Hu GD; Kuang J; Li JM
    Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao; 2009 Feb; 29(2):292-4. PubMed ID: 19246303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimized density-weighted imaging for dynamic contrast-enhanced 3D-MR mammography.
    Gutberlet M; Roth A; Hahn D; Köstler H
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2011 Feb; 33(2):328-39. PubMed ID: 21274974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Advances in breast imaging. Although mammography remains standard for breast cancer screening, several newer technologies are helping to fine-tune diagnosis.
    Harv Womens Health Watch; 2010 May; 17(9):1-3. PubMed ID: 20593556
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions.
    Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Padula S; Altomari F; Moriconi E; Pronio AM; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
    Radiology; 2007 Jun; 243(3):670-80. PubMed ID: 17446524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Integrated quantitative DCE-MRI and DW-MRI to characterize breast lesions.
    Jena A; Taneja S; Mehta SB
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S64-5. PubMed ID: 23083607
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM).
    Daniaux M; De Zordo T; Santner W; Amort B; Koppelstätter F; Jaschke W; Dromain C; Oberaigner W; Hubalek M; Marth C
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2015 Oct; 292(4):739-47. PubMed ID: 25814297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Critical pathways for the future: MR imaging and digital mammography.
    Newstead GM; Weinreb JC
    Radiographics; 1995 Jul; 15(4):951-62. PubMed ID: 7569140
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the evaluation of breast suspicious calcifications: diagnostic accuracy and impact on surgical management.
    Houben IP; Vanwetswinkel S; Kalia V; Thywissen T; Nelemans PJ; Heuts EM; Smidt ML; Meyer-Baese A; Wildberger JE; Lobbes M
    Acta Radiol; 2019 Sep; 60(9):1110-1117. PubMed ID: 30678480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Kinetic characterization of non-mass lesions on breast MRI using manual and computer assisted methods.
    Vag T; Baltzer PA; Dietzel M; Kaiser WA
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S177-8. PubMed ID: 23083580
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. MRI of the breast as part of the assessment in population-based mammography screening.
    Bick U; Engelken F; Diederichs G; Dzyuballa R; Ortmann M; Fallenberg EM
    Rofo; 2013 Sep; 185(9):849-56. PubMed ID: 23740312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Metals in MR-mammography: how to deal with it?
    Hargreaves BA; Daniel BL
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S56-8. PubMed ID: 23083602
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Co-registration of MR-mammography and X-ray mammography.
    Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Hopp T; Ruiter NV; Kaiser WA
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S27-9. PubMed ID: 23083591
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Practical application of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography [CE-MRM] by an algorithm combining morphological and enhancement patterns.
    Potente G; Messineo D; Maggi C; Savelli S
    Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2009 Mar; 33(2):83-90. PubMed ID: 19095407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Tests for breast cancer. Mammography is going digital. But is it better than film?
    Harv Health Lett; 2007 May; 32(7):4-5. PubMed ID: 17575613
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Whole-body MR or PET-CT?
    Schmidt GP
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81 Suppl 1():S142-3. PubMed ID: 23083566
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.