271 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27612001)
1. Imaging and Histopathologic Features of BI-RADS 3 Lesions Upgraded during Imaging Surveillance.
Michaels A; Chung CS; Birdwell RL; Frost EP; Giess CS
Breast J; 2017 Jan; 23(1):10-16. PubMed ID: 27612001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Patient compliance and diagnostic yield of 18-month unilateral follow-up in surveillance of probably benign mammographic lesions.
Chung CS; Giess CS; Gombos EC; Frost EP; Yeh ED; Raza S; Birdwell RL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Apr; 202(4):922-7. PubMed ID: 24660725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Surveillance of probably benign (BI-RADS 3) lesions in mammography: what is the right follow-up protocol?
Buch KA; Qureshi MM; Carpentier B; Cunningham DA; Stone M; Jaffe C; Quinn M; Gonzalez C; LaVoye J; Hines N; Bloch BN
Breast J; 2015; 21(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 25669425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Inter-reader Variability in the Use of BI-RADS Descriptors for Suspicious Findings on Diagnostic Mammography: A Multi-institution Study of 10 Academic Radiologists.
Lee AY; Wisner DJ; Aminololama-Shakeri S; Arasu VA; Feig SA; Hargreaves J; Ojeda-Fournier H; Bassett LW; Wells CJ; De Guzman J; Flowers CI; Campbell JE; Elson SL; Retallack H; Joe BN
Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):60-66. PubMed ID: 27793579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of rate of development and rate of change for benign and malignant breast calcifications at the lumpectomy bed.
Giess CS; Keating DM; Osborne MP; Mester J; Rosenblatt R
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2000 Sep; 175(3):789-93. PubMed ID: 10954468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Computer-aided classification of BI-RADS category 3 breast lesions.
Buchbinder SS; Leichter IS; Lederman RB; Novak B; Bamberger PN; Sklair-Levy M; Yarmish G; Fields SI
Radiology; 2004 Mar; 230(3):820-3. PubMed ID: 14739315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Interobserver variability in upgraded and non-upgraded BI-RADS 3 lesions.
Michaels AY; Chung CSW; Frost EP; Birdwell RL; Giess CS
Clin Radiol; 2017 Aug; 72(8):694.e1-694.e6. PubMed ID: 28381334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Tomosynthesis in the Diagnostic Setting: Changing Rates of BI-RADS Final Assessment over Time.
Raghu M; Durand MA; Andrejeva L; Goehler A; Michalski MH; Geisel JL; Hooley RJ; Horvath LJ; Butler R; Forman HP; Philpotts LE
Radiology; 2016 Oct; 281(1):54-61. PubMed ID: 27139264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Potential Use of American College of Radiology BI-RADS Mammography Atlas for Reporting and Assessing Lesions Detected on Dedicated Breast CT Imaging: Preliminary Study.
Jung HK; Kuzmiak CM; Kim KW; Choi NM; Kim HJ; Langman EL; Yoon S; Steen D; Zeng D; Gao F
Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1395-1401. PubMed ID: 28728854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Lesion and patient characteristics associated with malignancy after a probably benign finding on community practice mammography.
Lehman CD; Rutter CM; Eby PR; White E; Buist DS; Taplin SH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Feb; 190(2):511-5. PubMed ID: 18212240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risk of malignancy in palpable solid breast masses considered probably benign or low suspicion: implications for management.
Giess CS; Smeglin LZ; Meyer JE; Ritner JA; Birdwell RL
J Ultrasound Med; 2012 Dec; 31(12):1943-9. PubMed ID: 23197547
[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. A Pivotal Study of Optoacoustic Imaging to Diagnose Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists.
Neuschler EI; Butler R; Young CA; Barke LD; Bertrand ML; Böhm-Vélez M; Destounis S; Donlan P; Grobmyer SR; Katzen J; Kist KA; Lavin PT; Makariou EV; Parris TM; Schilling KJ; Tucker FL; Dogan BE
Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):398-412. PubMed ID: 29178816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Is stereotactic large-core needle biopsy beneficial prior to surgical treatment in BI-RADS 5 lesions?
Hoorntje LE; Peeters PH; Mali WP; Borel Rinkes IH
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2004 Jul; 86(2):165-70. PubMed ID: 15319568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. MRI for the assessment of malignancy in BI-RADS 4 mammographic microcalcifications.
Bennani-Baiti B; Dietzel M; Baltzer PA
PLoS One; 2017; 12(11):e0188679. PubMed ID: 29190656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Impact of Mammographic, Radiologist, and Patient Factors on the Likelihood of Probably Benign (BI-RADS 3) Assessment at Diagnostic Mammography.
Chesebro AL; Abbasi N; Lacson R; Chikarmane SA; Licaros ARL; Giess CS
J Breast Imaging; 2024 May; 6(3):246-253. PubMed ID: 38655858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Focal Breast Lesions in Clinical CT Examinations of the Chest: A Retrospective Analysis.
Krug KB; Houbois C; Grinstein O; Borggrefe J; Puesken M; Hanstein B; Malter W; Maintz D; Hellmich M
Rofo; 2017 Oct; 189(10):977-989. PubMed ID: 28683503
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. [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]
[Next] [New Search]
