685 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23291142)
1. [Comparative analysis of early diagnostic tools for breast cancer].
Shen SJ; Sun Q; Xu YL; Zhou YD; Guan JH; Mao F; Lin Y; Wang XJ; Han SM
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2012 Nov; 34(11):877-80. PubMed ID: 23291142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer.
Berg WA; Gutierrez L; NessAiver MS; Carter WB; Bhargavan M; Lewis RS; Ioffe OB
Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):830-49. PubMed ID: 15486214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Ultrasound is a useful adjunct to mammography in the assessment of breast tumours in all patients.
McCavert M; O'Donnell ME; Aroori S; Badger SA; Sharif MA; Crothers JG; Spence RA
Int J Clin Pract; 2009 Nov; 63(11):1589-94. PubMed ID: 19686337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Electrical impedance scanning in the differentiation of suspicious breast lesions: comparison with mammography, ultrasound and histopathology].
Fuchsjäger MH; Helbich TH; Ringl H; Funovics MA; Rudas M; Riedl C; Pfarl G
Rofo; 2002 Dec; 174(12):1522-9. PubMed ID: 12471524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Outcome of men presenting with clinical breast problems: the role of mammography and ultrasound.
Patterson SK; Helvie MA; Aziz K; Nees AV
Breast J; 2006; 12(5):418-23. PubMed ID: 16958958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of mammography and ultrasound in women with breast disease: a receiver operating characteristic analysis.
Ying X; Lin Y; Xia X; Hu B; Zhu Z; He P
Breast J; 2012; 18(2):130-8. PubMed ID: 22356352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Diagnostic value of full-field digital mammography for breast carcinoma].
Ding JH; Peng WJ; Jiang ZX; Xu LH; Hu DT; Zheng XJ
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2009 Nov; 31(11):854-7. PubMed ID: 20137352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Accuracy of clinical examination, digital mammogram, ultrasound, and MRI in determining postneoadjuvant pathologic tumor response in operable breast cancer patients.
Croshaw R; Shapiro-Wright H; Svensson E; Erb K; Julian T
Ann Surg Oncol; 2011 Oct; 18(11):3160-3. PubMed ID: 21947594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The accuracy of "one-stop" diagnosis for 1,110 patients presenting to a symptomatic breast clinic.
Eltahir A; Jibril JA; Squair J; Heys SD; Ah-See AK; Needham G; Gilbert FJ; Deans HE; McKean ME; Smart LM; Eremin O
J R Coll Surg Edinb; 1999 Aug; 44(4):226-30. PubMed ID: 10453144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Fine needle aspiration biopsy of breast lesions: institutional experience].
Medina-Franco H; Abarca-Pérez L; Cortés-González R; Soto-Germes S; Ulloa JA; Uribe N
Rev Invest Clin; 2005; 57(3):394-8. PubMed ID: 16187698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Technetium-99m sestamibi scintimammography: the influence of histopathological characteristics, lesion size and the presence of carcinoma in situ in the detection of breast carcinoma.
Howarth D; Sillar R; Clark D; Lan L
Eur J Nucl Med; 1999 Nov; 26(11):1475-81. PubMed ID: 10552090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Longitudinal measurement of clinical mammographic breast density to improve estimation of breast cancer risk.
Kerlikowske K; Ichikawa L; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Vacek PM; Smith-Bindman R; Yankaskas B; Carney PA; Ballard-Barbash R;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Mar; 99(5):386-95. PubMed ID: 17341730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Retrospective and comparative analysis of (99m)Tc-Sestamibi breast specific gamma imaging versus mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of breast cancer in Chinese women.
Yu X; Hu G; Zhang Z; Qiu F; Shao X; Wang X; Zhan H; Chen Y; Deng Y; Huang J
BMC Cancer; 2016 Jul; 16():450. PubMed ID: 27401536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of
Liu H; Zhan H; Sun D
BMC Cancer; 2020 May; 20(1):463. PubMed ID: 32448217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. CE-Magnetic Resonance Mammography for the evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed breast cancer.
Pediconi F; Venditti F; Padula S; Roselli A; Moriconi E; Giacomelli L; Catalano C; Passariello R
Radiol Med; 2005; 110(1-2):61-8. PubMed ID: 16163140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Diagnostic accuracy of Tc-99m-MIBI for breast carcinoma in correlation with mammography and sonography.
Habib S; Maseeh-uz-Zaman ; Hameed A; Niaz K; Hashmi H; Kamal S
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2009 Oct; 19(10):622-6. PubMed ID: 19811712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A Cross-Sectional Observational Study to Compare the Role of Ultrasound with Mammography in Women Identified at High Risk for Breast Cancer in a Population in China.
An P; Zhong S; Zhang R; Hou X; Xi R; Wang Y
Med Sci Monit; 2020 Jun; 26():e919777. PubMed ID: 32576809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses.
Chan CH; Coopey SB; Freer PE; Hughes KS
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Oct; 153(3):699-702. PubMed ID: 26341750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
