219 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25439008)
1. Cone beam breast CT with multiplanar and three dimensional visualization in differentiating breast masses compared with mammography.
Zhao B; Zhang X; Cai W; Conover D; Ning R
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jan; 84(1):48-53. PubMed ID: 25439008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Comparison of the diagnostic efficiency in breast malignancy between cone beam breast CT and mammography in dense breast].
Liu AD; Ma Y; Yin L; Han P; Li HJ; Ye ZX
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2018 Aug; 40(8):604-609. PubMed ID: 30139031
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast-CT (CBBCT): clinical performance compared to mammography and MRI.
Wienbeck S; Fischer U; Luftner-Nagel S; Lotz J; Uhlig J
Eur Radiol; 2018 Sep; 28(9):3731-3741. PubMed ID: 29594402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A Reliability Comparison of Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography and Mammography: Breast Density Assessment Referring to the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas.
Ma Y; Cao Y; Liu A; Yin L; Han P; Li H; Zhang X; Ye Z
Acad Radiol; 2019 Jun; 26(6):752-759. PubMed ID: 30220584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The role of cone-beam breast-CT for breast cancer detection relative to breast density.
Wienbeck S; Uhlig J; Luftner-Nagel S; Zapf A; Surov A; von Fintel E; Stahnke V; Lotz J; Fischer U
Eur Radiol; 2017 Dec; 27(12):5185-5195. PubMed ID: 28677053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Dedicated Cone-beam Breast Computed Tomography and Diagnostic Mammography: Comparison of Radiation Dose, Patient Comfort, And Qualitative Review of Imaging Findings in BI-RADS 4 and 5 Lesions.
O'Connell AM; Kawakyu-O'Connor D
J Clin Imaging Sci; 2012; 2():7. PubMed ID: 22439131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cone-beam CT for breast imaging: Radiation dose, breast coverage, and image quality.
O'Connell A; Conover DL; Zhang Y; Seifert P; Logan-Young W; Lin CF; Sahler L; Ning R
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Aug; 195(2):496-509. PubMed ID: 20651210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cone-beam breast CT features associated with HER2/neu overexpression in patients with primary breast cancer.
Zhu Y; Zhang Y; Ma Y; Li H; Liu A; Han P; Yin L; Lv N; Li Z; Lu H; Liu P; Ye Z
Eur Radiol; 2020 May; 30(5):2731-2739. PubMed ID: 31900700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Pre- and post-contrast versus post-contrast cone-beam breast CT: can we reduce radiation exposure while maintaining diagnostic accuracy?
Uhlig J; Fischer U; Biggemann L; Lotz J; Wienbeck S
Eur Radiol; 2019 Jun; 29(6):3141-3148. PubMed ID: 30488110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast-CT: Analysis of optimal acquisition time for discrimination of breast lesion malignancy.
Uhlig J; Fischer U; Surov A; Lotz J; Wienbeck S
Eur J Radiol; 2018 Feb; 99():9-16. PubMed ID: 29362157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Review of clinical studies and first clinical experiences with a commercially available cone-beam breast CT in Europe.
Wienbeck S; Lotz J; Fischer U
Clin Imaging; 2017; 42():50-59. PubMed ID: 27875762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quantitative breast density measurement based on three-dimensional images: a study on cone-beam breast computed tomography.
Liu A; Yin L; Ma Y; Han P; Wu Y; Wu Y; Ye Z
Acta Radiol; 2022 Aug; 63(8):1023-1031. PubMed ID: 34259021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison between cone-beam breast-CT and full-field digital mammography for microcalcification detection depending on breast density.
Wienbeck S; Andrijevska V; Kück F; Perske C; Unterberg-Buchwald C; Fischer U; Lotz J; Kunze M
Medicine (Baltimore); 2023 Jun; 102(22):e33900. PubMed ID: 37266644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. CT values of contrast-enhanced CBBCT: A useful diagnostic tool for benign and malignant breast lesions.
Wei W; Yi XL; Yang J; Liao H; Su D
Acta Radiol; 2023 Aug; 64(8):2379-2386. PubMed ID: 37287251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Characterization of Breast Masses in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammograms: An Observer Performance Study.
Chan HP; Helvie MA; Hadjiiski L; Jeffries DO; Klein KA; Neal CH; Noroozian M; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA
Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1372-1379. PubMed ID: 28647388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of 3D and 2D shear-wave elastography for differentiating benign and malignant breast masses: focus on the diagnostic performance.
Choi HY; Sohn YM; Seo M
Clin Radiol; 2017 Oct; 72(10):878-886. PubMed ID: 28526455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of propagation-based CT using synchrotron radiation and conventional cone-beam CT for breast imaging.
Tavakoli Taba S; Baran P; Nesterets YI; Pacile S; Wienbeck S; Dullin C; Pavlov K; Maksimenko A; Lockie D; Mayo SC; Quiney HM; Dreossi D; Arfelli F; Tromba G; Lewis S; Gureyev TE; Brennan PC
Eur Radiol; 2020 May; 30(5):2740-2750. PubMed ID: 31974689
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of comfort between cone beam breast computed tomography and digital mammography.
Li H; Yin L; He N; Han P; Zhu Y; Ma Y; Liu A; Lu H; Gao Z; Liu P; Wu Y; Ye Z
Eur J Radiol; 2019 Nov; 120():108674. PubMed ID: 31557718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam breast computed tomography: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis.
Uhlig J; Uhlig A; Biggemann L; Fischer U; Lotz J; Wienbeck S
Eur Radiol; 2019 Mar; 29(3):1194-1202. PubMed ID: 30255249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. TU-E-217BCD-08: Extraction and Insertion of Tumor Masses in Cone Beam Breast CT Images.
Lai C; Shen Y; Zhong Y; Whitman G; Yang W; Wang T; Shaw C
Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6Part24):3915. PubMed ID: 28518685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
