227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23927321)
1. Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part II. Dual-energy imaging.
Hill ML; Mainprize JG; Carton AK; Saab-Puong S; Iordache R; Muller S; Jong RA; Dromain C; Yaffe MJ
Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081907. PubMed ID: 23927321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part I. Single-energy imaging.
Hill ML; Mainprize JG; Carton AK; Muller S; Ebrahimi M; Jong RA; Dromain C; Yaffe MJ
Med Phys; 2013 May; 40(5):051910. PubMed ID: 23635280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Optimization of contrast-enhanced breast imaging: Analysis using a cascaded linear system model.
Hu YH; Scaduto DA; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2017 Jan; 44(1):43-56. PubMed ID: 28044312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
Francescone MA; Jochelson MS; Dershaw DD; Sung JS; Hughes MC; Zheng J; Moskowitz C; Morris EA
Eur J Radiol; 2014 Aug; 83(8):1350-5. PubMed ID: 24932846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Phantom study to evaluate contrast-medium-enhanced digital subtraction mammography with a full-field indirect-detection system.
Palma BA; Rosado-Méndez I; Villaseñor Y; Brandan ME
Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):577-89. PubMed ID: 20229866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Analytical optimization of digital subtraction mammography with contrast medium using a commercial unit.
Rosado-Méndez I; Palma BA; Brandan ME
Med Phys; 2008 Dec; 35(12):5544-57. PubMed ID: 19175112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
Dromain C; Balleyguier C; Adler G; Garbay JR; Delaloge S
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Jan; 69(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 18790584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. High Energy Resolution Hyperspectral X-Ray Imaging for Low-Dose Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography.
Pani S; Saifuddin SC; Ferreira FIM; Henthorn N; Seller P; Sellin PJ; Stratmann P; Veale MC; Wilson MD; Cernik RJ
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2017 Sep; 36(9):1784-1795. PubMed ID: 28541197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Susceptibility of iodine concentration map of dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography for quantitative and tumor enhancement assessment.
Hwang YS; Cheung YC; Lin YY; Hsu HL; Tsai HY
Acta Radiol; 2018 Aug; 59(8):893-901. PubMed ID: 29117707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Contamination artifact that mimics in-situ carcinoma on contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
Gluskin J; Click M; Fleischman R; Dromain C; Morris EA; Jochelson MS
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Oct; 95():147-154. PubMed ID: 28987661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A dual-energy subtraction technique for microcalcification imaging in digital mammography--a signal-to-noise analysis.
Lemacks MR; Kappadath SC; Shaw CC; Liu X; Whitman GJ
Med Phys; 2002 Aug; 29(8):1739-51. PubMed ID: 12201421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of False-Positive Versus True-Positive Findings on Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography.
Amir T; Hogan MP; Jacobs S; Sevilimedu V; Sung J; Jochelson MS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 May; 218(5):797-808. PubMed ID: 34817195
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluating noise reduction techniques while considering anatomical noise in dual-energy contrast-enhanced mammography.
Allec N; Abbaszadeh S; Scott CC; Karim KS; Lewin JM
Med Phys; 2013 May; 40(5):051904. PubMed ID: 23635274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Contrast-enhanced dual energy mammography with a novel anode/filter combination and artifact reduction: a feasibility study.
Knogler T; Homolka P; Hörnig M; Leithner R; Langs G; Waitzbauer M; Pinker-Domenig K; Leitner S; Helbich TH
Eur Radiol; 2016 Jun; 26(6):1575-81. PubMed ID: 26373754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Search for novel contrast materials in dual-energy x-ray breast imaging using theoretical modeling of contrast-to-noise ratio.
Karunamuni R; Maidment AD
Phys Med Biol; 2014 Aug; 59(15):4311-24. PubMed ID: 25029534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results.
Dromain C; Thibault F; Muller S; Rimareix F; Delaloge S; Tardivon A; Balleyguier C
Eur Radiol; 2011 Mar; 21(3):565-74. PubMed ID: 20839001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A Quantification Method for Breast Tissue Thickness and Iodine Concentration Using Photon-Counting Detector.
Han S
J Digit Imaging; 2015 Oct; 28(5):594-603. PubMed ID: 25708894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Contrast-enhanced dual-energy mammography: a promising new imaging tool in breast cancer detection.
Lalji U; Lobbes M
Womens Health (Lond); 2014 May; 10(3):289-98. PubMed ID: 24956295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Classification of Breast Masses Using a Computer-Aided Diagnosis Scheme of Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammograms.
Danala G; Patel B; Aghaei F; Heidari M; Li J; Wu T; Zheng B
Ann Biomed Eng; 2018 Sep; 46(9):1419-1431. PubMed ID: 29748869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement.
Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Jeunehomme F; Muller S; Hamm B; Bick U
Invest Radiol; 2005 Jul; 40(7):397-404. PubMed ID: 15973130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
