222 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27456031)
1. How I report breast magnetic resonance imaging studies for breast cancer staging and screening.
Vinnicombe S
Cancer Imaging; 2016 Jul; 16(1):17. PubMed ID: 27456031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Standardized diagnosis and reporting of breast cancer.
Thomassin-Naggara I; Tardivon A; Chopier J
Diagn Interv Imaging; 2014; 95(7-8):759-66. PubMed ID: 25017150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. BI-RADS decoded: detailed guidance on potentially confusing issues.
D'Orsi CJ; Newell MS
Radiol Clin North Am; 2007 Sep; 45(5):751-63, v. PubMed ID: 17888766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Current Status and Future of BI-RADS in Multimodality Imaging, From the
Eghtedari M; Chong A; Rakow-Penner R; Ojeda-Fournier H
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Apr; 216(4):860-873. PubMed ID: 33295802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [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]
6. BI-RADS
Spak DA; Plaxco JS; Santiago L; Dryden MJ; Dogan BE
Diagn Interv Imaging; 2017 Mar; 98(3):179-190. PubMed ID: 28131457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. MRI in the Assessment of BI-RADS® 4 lesions.
Leithner D; Wengert G; Helbich T; Morris E; Pinker K
Top Magn Reson Imaging; 2017 Oct; 26(5):191-199. PubMed ID: 28961568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A Pictorial Review of Changes in the BI-RADS Fifth Edition.
Rao AA; Feneis J; Lalonde C; Ojeda-Fournier H
Radiographics; 2016; 36(3):623-39. PubMed ID: 27082663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. How should screening breast US be audited? The BI-RADS perspective.
Sickles EA; D'Orsi CJ
Radiology; 2014 Aug; 272(2):316-20. PubMed ID: 25058131
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [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]
11. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS).
Liberman L; Menell JH
Radiol Clin North Am; 2002 May; 40(3):409-30, v. PubMed ID: 12117184
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. US of breast masses categorized as BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5: pictorial review of factors influencing clinical management.
Raza S; Goldkamp AL; Chikarmane SA; Birdwell RL
Radiographics; 2010 Sep; 30(5):1199-213. PubMed ID: 20833845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Is a one-year follow-up an efficient method for better management of MRI BI-RADS(®) 3 lesions?
Boisserie-Lacroix M; Ziadé C; Hurtevent-Labrot G; Ferron S; Brouste V; Lippa N
Breast; 2016 Jun; 27():1-7. PubMed ID: 27212693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Prevalence and Predictive Value of BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 Lesions Detected on Breast MRI: Correlation with Study Indication.
Chikarmane SA; Tai R; Meyer JE; Giess CS
Acad Radiol; 2017 Apr; 24(4):435-441. PubMed ID: 27955878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Tailored breast cancer screening program with microdose mammography, US, and MR Imaging: short-term results of a pilot study in 40-49-year-old women.
Venturini E; Losio C; Panizza P; Rodighiero MG; Fedele I; Tacchini S; Schiani E; Ravelli S; Cristel G; Panzeri MM; De Cobelli F; Del Maschio A
Radiology; 2013 Aug; 268(2):347-55. PubMed ID: 23579052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Utility of BI-RADS Assessment Category 4 Subdivisions for Screening Breast MRI.
Strigel RM; Burnside ES; Elezaby M; Fowler AM; Kelcz F; Salkowski LR; DeMartini WB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jun; 208(6):1392-1399. PubMed ID: 28792802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Who should have breast magnetic resonance imaging evaluation?
Orel S
J Clin Oncol; 2008 Feb; 26(5):703-11. PubMed ID: 18258977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The challenge of imaging dense breast parenchyma: is magnetic resonance mammography the technique of choice? A comparative study with x-ray mammography and whole-breast ultrasound.
Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Dominelli V; Cagioli S; Karatasiou A; Pronio A; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
Invest Radiol; 2009 Jul; 44(7):412-21. PubMed ID: 19448554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Characterization of breast lesions with CE-MR multimodal morphological and kinetic analysis: comparison with conventional mammography and high-resolution ultrasound.
Vassiou K; Kanavou T; Vlychou M; Poultsidi A; Athanasiou E; Arvanitis DL; Fezoulidis IV
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Apr; 70(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 18295425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
