172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23720144)
1. Improving outcomes of screening breast MRI with practice evolution: initial clinical experience with 3T compared to 1.5T.
Lourenco AP; Donegan L; Khalil H; Mainiero MB
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2014 Mar; 39(3):535-9. PubMed ID: 23720144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Screening breast MR imaging: comparison of interpretation of baseline and annual follow-up studies.
Abramovici G; Mainiero MB
Radiology; 2011 Apr; 259(1):85-91. PubMed ID: 21285337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. BI-RADS® 3 lesions at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: is an initial short-interval follow-up necessary?
Bahrs SD; Baur A; Hattermann V; Hahn M; Vogel U; Claussen CD; Siegmann-Luz KC
Acta Radiol; 2014 Apr; 55(3):260-5. PubMed ID: 23969262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Results of MR imaging screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with lobular carcinoma in situ.
Friedlander LC; Roth SO; Gavenonis SC
Radiology; 2011 Nov; 261(2):421-7. PubMed ID: 21900618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Prevalence and Predictive Value of BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 Lesions Detected on Breast MRI: Correlation with Study Indication.
Chikarmane SA; Tai R; Meyer JE; Giess CS
Acad Radiol; 2017 Apr; 24(4):435-441. PubMed ID: 27955878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Background parenchymal enhancement on baseline screening breast MRI: impact on biopsy rate and short-interval follow-up.
Hambly NM; Liberman L; Dershaw DD; Brennan S; Morris EA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jan; 196(1):218-24. PubMed ID: 21178070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Application value of 3T ¹H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy in diagnosing breast tumors.
Vassiou K; Tsougos I; Kousi E; Vlychou M; Athanasiou E; Theodorou K; Arvanitis DL; Fezoulidis IV
Acta Radiol; 2013 May; 54(4):380-8. PubMed ID: 23436823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. False-positive findings at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: a BI-RADS descriptor study.
Baltzer PA; Benndorf M; Dietzel M; Gajda M; Runnebaum IB; Kaiser WA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Jun; 194(6):1658-63. PubMed ID: 20489110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Characteristics of probably benign breast MRI lesions.
Eby PR; DeMartini WB; Gutierrez RL; Saini MH; Peacock S; Lehman CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Sep; 193(3):861-7. PubMed ID: 19696303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Nonsurgical management of high-risk lesions diagnosed at core needle biopsy: can malignancy be ruled out safely with breast MRI?
Linda A; Zuiani C; Furlan A; Lorenzon M; Londero V; Girometti R; Bazzocchi M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Feb; 198(2):272-80. PubMed ID: 22268168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Probably benign breast MRI lesions: frequency, lesion type, and rate of malignancy.
Lourenco AP; Chung MT; Mainiero MB
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2014 Apr; 39(4):789-94. PubMed ID: 24108546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. BI-RADS lesion characteristics predict likelihood of malignancy in breast MRI for masses but not for nonmasslike enhancement.
Gutierrez RL; DeMartini WB; Eby PR; Kurland BF; Peacock S; Lehman CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Oct; 193(4):994-1000. PubMed ID: 19770321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Diagnostic value of a breast MRI score for the prediction of malignancy of breast lesions detected solely with MRI].
Siegmann KC; Moron HU; Baur A; Hahn M; Vogel U; Claussen CD; Bitzer M
Rofo; 2009 Jun; 181(6):556-63. PubMed ID: 19452398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Suspicious breast lesions detected at 3.0 T magnetic resonance imaging: clinical and histological outcomes.
Johnson KS; Baker JA; Lee SS; Soo MS
Acad Radiol; 2012 Jun; 19(6):667-74. PubMed ID: 22459645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Can breast MRI computer-aided detection (CAD) improve radiologist accuracy for lesions detected at MRI screening and recommended for biopsy in a high-risk population?
Arazi-Kleinman T; Causer PA; Jong RA; Hill K; Warner E
Clin Radiol; 2009 Dec; 64(12):1166-74. PubMed ID: 19913125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Screening Breast MRI in Patients Previously Treated for Breast Cancer: Diagnostic Yield for Cancer and Abnormal Interpretation Rate.
Giess CS; Poole PS; Chikarmane SA; Sippo DA; Birdwell RL
Acad Radiol; 2015 Nov; 22(11):1331-7. PubMed ID: 26142951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for Breast MR imaging (DETECT Trial).
Martincich L; Faivre-Pierret M; Zechmann CM; Corcione S; van den Bosch HC; Peng WJ; Petrillo A; Siegmann KC; Heverhagen JT; Panizza P; Gehl HB; Diekmann F; Pediconi F; Ma L; Gilbert FJ; Sardanelli F; Belli P; Salvatore M; Kreitner KF; Weiss CM; Zuiani C
Radiology; 2011 Feb; 258(2):396-408. PubMed ID: 21163915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. An Abbreviated Protocol for High-risk Screening Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Impact on Performance Metrics and BI-RADS Assessment.
Panigrahi B; Mullen L; Falomo E; Panigrahi B; Harvey S
Acad Radiol; 2017 Sep; 24(9):1132-1138. PubMed ID: 28506511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Breast cancer detected on an incident (second or subsequent) round of screening MRI: MRI features of false-negative cases.
Yamaguchi K; Schacht D; Newstead GM; Bradbury AR; Verp MS; Olopade OI; Abe H
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Nov; 201(5):1155-63. PubMed ID: 24147491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. High-resolution diffusion-weighted imaging for the separation of benign from malignant BI-RADS 4/5 lesions found on breast MRI at 3T.
Wisner DJ; Rogers N; Deshpande VS; Newitt DN; Laub GA; Porter DA; Kornak J; Joe BN; Hylton NM
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2014 Sep; 40(3):674-81. PubMed ID: 24214467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
