536 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26422910)
1. [Neddle-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of non-palpable breast cancer].
Becerra-Alcántara GI; Círigo-Villagómez LL; Ramos-Medina F; Robledo-Martínez H; Mar-Merinos CG; Panzi-Altamirano RM
Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2015 Jul; 83(7):400-7. PubMed ID: 26422910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses.
Chan CH; Coopey SB; Freer PE; Hughes KS
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Oct; 153(3):699-702. PubMed ID: 26341750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Palpable masses in breast during lactation.
Obenauer S; Dammert S
Clin Imaging; 2007; 31(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 17189838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Imaging findings and accuracy of core needle biopsy in mucinous carcinoma of the breast.
Bode MK; Rissanen T
Acta Radiol; 2011 Mar; 52(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 21498339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. [Use of BI-RADS to interpret magnetic resonance mammography for breast cancer].
Kharuzhyk SA; Shimanets SV; Karman AV; Shapoval EV
Vestn Rentgenol Radiol; 2014; (4):46-59. PubMed ID: 25775888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. BI-RADS Category 5 Assessments at Diagnostic Breast Imaging:Outcomes Analysis Based on Lesion Descriptors.
Yao MM; Joe BN; Sickles EA; Lee CS
Acad Radiol; 2019 Aug; 26(8):1048-1052. PubMed ID: 30195413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Performance of users in tropical areas with the BI-RADS classification of breast lesions for predicting malignancy].
Gonsu Kamga JE; Moifo B; Sando Z; Guegang Goudjou E; Nko'o Amvene S; Gonsu Fotsin J
Med Sante Trop; 2013; 23(4):439-44. PubMed ID: 24334372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Mammographic characteristics and vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) of non-palpable breast lesions.
Ventrella V; Tufaro A; Zito FA; Addante M; Stea B; Dentamaro R; D'Amico C; Paradiso A
Acta Radiol; 2011 Jul; 52(6):602-7. PubMed ID: 21565889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of abnormal mammography results and palpable breast abnormalities.
Kerlikowske K; Smith-Bindman R; Ljung BM; Grady D
Ann Intern Med; 2003 Aug; 139(4):274-84. PubMed ID: 12965983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.
Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS
Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Stereotactic Mammotome breast biopsy: routine clinical experience and correlation with BI-RADS--classification and histopathology].
Michel SC; Löw R; Singer G; Otto R; Hohl M; Kubik RA
Praxis (Bern 1994); 2007 Sep; 96(39):1459-74. PubMed ID: 17966279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Can the radiologist accurately predict the adequacy of sampling when performing ultrasound-guided core biopsy of BI-RADS category 4 and 5 lesions detected on screening mammography?
Doyle JM; O'Doherty A; Coffey L; Pender S; Hill A; Quinn C
Clin Radiol; 2005 Sep; 60(9):999-1005. PubMed ID: 16124982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Outcomes of solid palpable masses assessed as BI-RADS 3 or 4A: a retrospective review.
Patterson SK; Neal CH; Jeffries DO; Joe A; Klein K; Bailey J; Pinsky R; Paramagul C; Watcharotone K
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2014 Sep; 147(2):311-6. PubMed ID: 25151294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Efficiency of Core Biopsy for BI-RADS-5 Breast Lesions.
Wolf R; Quan G; Calhoun K; Soot L; Skokan L
Breast J; 2008; 14(5):471-5. PubMed ID: 18821933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Positive predictive value of breast cancer in the lesions categorized as BI-RADS category 5.
Wiratkapun C; Lertsithichai P; Wibulpholprasert B
J Med Assoc Thai; 2006 Aug; 89(8):1253-9. PubMed ID: 17048437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions: value of US in management--follow-up and outcome.
Raza S; Chikarmane SA; Neilsen SS; Zorn LM; Birdwell RL
Radiology; 2008 Sep; 248(3):773-81. PubMed ID: 18647850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Clinical evaluation of full-field digital mammography and breast imaging reporting and data system on breast diseases].
Li JG; Li S; Liu Q; Zhao TT
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2007 Apr; 45(7):464-6. PubMed ID: 17686303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Small (< 2.0-cm) breast cancers: mammographic and US findings at US-guided cryoablation--initial experience.
Roubidoux MA; Sabel MS; Bailey JE; Kleer CG; Klein KA; Helvie MA
Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):857-67. PubMed ID: 15567802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A Simulation Screening Mammography Module Created for Instruction and Assessment: Radiology Residents vs National Benchmarks.
Poot JD; Chetlen AL
Acad Radiol; 2016 Nov; 23(11):1454-1462. PubMed ID: 27637285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
