310 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25086534)
1. A complete software application for automatic registration of x-ray mammography and magnetic resonance images.
Solves-Llorens JA; Rupérez MJ; Monserrat C; Feliu E; García M; Lloret M
Med Phys; 2014 Aug; 41(8):081903. PubMed ID: 25086534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Breast lesion co-localisation between X-ray and MR images using finite element modelling.
Lee AW; Rajagopal V; Babarenda Gamage TP; Doyle AJ; Nielsen PM; Nash MP
Med Image Anal; 2013 Dec; 17(8):1256-64. PubMed ID: 23860392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. MRI to X-ray mammography registration using a volume-preserving affine transformation.
Mertzanidou T; Hipwell J; Cardoso MJ; Zhang X; Tanner C; Ourselin S; Bick U; Huisman H; Karssemeijer N; Hawkes D
Med Image Anal; 2012 Jul; 16(5):966-75. PubMed ID: 22513136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Fusion of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography at 3.0T with X-ray mammograms: pilot study evaluation using dedicated semi-automatic registration software.
Dietzel M; Hopp T; Ruiter N; Zoubi R; Runnebaum IB; Kaiser WA; Baltzer PA
Eur J Radiol; 2011 Aug; 79(2):e98-e102. PubMed ID: 21570793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Automatic multimodal 2D/3D breast image registration using biomechanical FEM models and intensity-based optimization.
Hopp T; Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Kreisel P; Kaiser WA; Gemmeke H; Ruiter NV
Med Image Anal; 2013 Feb; 17(2):209-18. PubMed ID: 23265802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Automated registration of diagnostic to prediagnostic x-ray mammograms: evaluation and comparison to radiologists' accuracy.
Pinto Pereira SM; Hipwell JH; McCormack VA; Tanner C; Moss SM; Wilkinson LS; Khoo LA; Pagliari C; Skippage PL; Kliger CJ; Hawkes DJ; Silva IM
Med Phys; 2010 Sep; 37(9):4530-9. PubMed ID: 20964170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging.
Pertuz S; McDonald ES; Weinstein SP; Conant EF; Kontos D
Radiology; 2016 Apr; 279(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 26491909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A new validation method for X-ray mammogram registration algorithms using a projection model of breast X-ray compression.
Hipwell JH; Tanner C; Crum WR; Schnabel JA; Hawkes DJ
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2007 Sep; 26(9):1190-200. PubMed ID: 17896592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Correlation between mammographic density and volumetric fibroglandular tissue estimated on breast MR images.
Wei J; Chan HP; Helvie MA; Roubidoux MA; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Zhou C; Paquerault S; Chenevert T; Goodsitt MM
Med Phys; 2004 Apr; 31(4):933-42. PubMed ID: 15125012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Towards an in-plane methodology to track breast lesions using mammograms and patient-specific finite-element simulations.
Lapuebla-Ferri A; Cegoñino-Banzo J; Jiménez-Mocholí AJ; Del Palomar AP
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Nov; 62(22):8720-8738. PubMed ID: 29091591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantitative evaluation of free-form deformation registration for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR mammography.
Tanner C; Schnabel JA; Hill DL; Hawkes DJ; Degenhard A; Leach MO; Hose DR; Hall-Craggs MA; Usiskin SI
Med Phys; 2007 Apr; 34(4):1221-33. PubMed ID: 17500454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Influence of using manual or automatic breast density information in a mass detection CAD system.
Oliver A; Lladó X; Freixenet J; Martí R; Pérez E; Pont J; Zwiggelaar R
Acad Radiol; 2010 Jul; 17(7):877-83. PubMed ID: 20540910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Breast MRI and X-ray mammography registration using gradient values.
García E; Diez Y; Diaz O; Lladó X; Gubern-Mérida A; Martí R; Martí J; Oliver A
Med Image Anal; 2019 May; 54():76-87. PubMed ID: 30836308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Correspondence in texture features between two mammographic views.
Gupta S; Markey MK
Med Phys; 2005 Jun; 32(6):1598-606. PubMed ID: 16013719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Automatic identification and classification of characteristic kinetic curves of breast lesions on DCE-MRI.
Chen W; Giger ML; Bick U; Newstead GM
Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2878-87. PubMed ID: 16964864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Validation of nonrigid image registration using finite-element methods: application to breast MR images.
Schnabel JA; Tanner C; Castellano-Smith AD; Degenhard A; Leach MO; Hose DR; Hill DL; Hawkes DJ
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2003 Feb; 22(2):238-47. PubMed ID: 12716000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Fatty and fibroglandular tissue volumes in the breasts of women 20-83 years old: comparison of X-ray mammography and computer-assisted MR imaging.
Lee NA; Rusinek H; Weinreb J; Chandra R; Toth H; Singer C; Newstead G
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 Feb; 168(2):501-6. PubMed ID: 9016235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Deformable mapping using biomechanical models to relate corresponding lesions in digital breast tomosynthesis and automated breast ultrasound images.
Green CA; Goodsitt MM; Roubidoux MA; Brock KK; Davis CL; Lau JH; Carson PL
Med Image Anal; 2020 Feb; 60():101599. PubMed ID: 31760192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Fusion of contrast-enhanced breast MR and mammographic imaging data.
Behrenbruch CP; Marias K; Armitage PA; Yam M; Moore N; English RE; Clarke J; Brady M
Med Image Anal; 2003 Sep; 7(3):311-40. PubMed ID: 12946471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
