These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26170752)
1. Comparison of mammography sensitivity after reduction mammoplasty targeting the glandular and fat tissue. Çakır M; Küçükkartallar T; Tekin A; Selimoğlu N; Poyraz N; Belviranlı MM; Kartal A Ulus Cerrahi Derg; 2015; 31(2):68-71. PubMed ID: 26170752 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mammographic breast density: How it affects performance indicators in screening programmes? Posso M; Louro J; Sánchez M; Román M; Vidal C; Sala M; Baré M; Castells X; Eur J Radiol; 2019 Jan; 110():81-87. PubMed ID: 30599878 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Analysis of the results of mammography screening in Dubrovnik-Neretva County in the 2006-2009 period]. Dzono-Boban A; Mratović MC; Masanović M Acta Med Croatica; 2010 Dec; 64(5):453-9. PubMed ID: 21692270 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Breast tomosynthesis for the clarification of mammographic BI-RADS 3 lesions can decrease follow-up examinations and enables immediate cancer diagnosis. Bahrs SD; Otto V; Hattermann V; Klumpp B; Hahn M; Nikolaou K; Siegmann-Luz K Acta Radiol; 2018 Oct; 59(10):1176-1183. PubMed ID: 29451022 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Hooley RJ; Greenberg KL; Stackhouse RM; Geisel JL; Butler RS; Philpotts LE Radiology; 2012 Oct; 265(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 22723501 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Breast MRI as an adjunct to mammography: Does it really suffer from low specificity? A retrospective analysis stratified by mammographic BI-RADS classes. Benndorf M; Baltzer PA; Vag T; Gajda M; Runnebaum IB; Kaiser WA Acta Radiol; 2010 Sep; 51(7):715-21. PubMed ID: 20707656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions. Varas X; Leborgne JH; Leborgne F; Mezzera J; Jaumandreu S; Leborgne F AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Sep; 179(3):691-5. PubMed ID: 12185047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical Outcomes of Mammographic BI-RADS 3 Lesions in the Community Hospital Setting. Friedman P; Kerwin L; Chung J Can Assoc Radiol J; 2016 Nov; 67(4):313-317. PubMed ID: 27523446 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in screening detected microcalcification lesions of the breast: is there any value? Uematsu T; Yuen S; Kasami M; Uchida Y Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Jul; 103(3):269-81. PubMed ID: 17063274 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mammographic findings after breast augmentation with autologous fat injection. Carvajal J; Patiño JH Aesthet Surg J; 2008; 28(2):153-62. PubMed ID: 19083521 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Sensitivity of screening mammography by density and texture: a cohort study from a population-based screening program in Denmark. von Euler-Chelpin M; Lillholm M; Vejborg I; Nielsen M; Lynge E Breast Cancer Res; 2019 Oct; 21(1):111. PubMed ID: 31623646 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Screening methods (clinical breast examination and mammography) to detect breast cancer in women aged 40-49 years. Takkar N; Kochhar S; Garg P; Pandey AK; Dalal UR; Handa U J Midlife Health; 2017; 8(1):2-10. PubMed ID: 28458473 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Evaluation of the results after using of the BI-RADS categories in 1,777 clinical mammograms]. Hauth EA; Khan K; Wolfgarten B; Betzler A; Kimmig R; Forsting M Radiologe; 2008 Mar; 48(3):281-8. PubMed ID: 17265008 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Automated and Clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Density Measures Predict Risk for Screen-Detected and Interval Cancers: A Case-Control Study. Kerlikowske K; Scott CG; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Ma L; Winham S; Jensen MR; Wu FF; Malkov S; Pankratz VS; Cummings SR; Shepherd JA; Brandt KR; Miglioretti DL; Vachon CM Ann Intern Med; 2018 Jun; 168(11):757-765. PubMed ID: 29710124 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 mammograms and the use of stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in a nonacademic community practice. Mendez A; Cabanillas F; Echenique M; Malekshamran K; Perez I; Ramos E Cancer; 2004 Feb; 100(4):710-4. PubMed ID: 14770425 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging. Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]