660 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27861206)
1. Comparison of the Detection Rate of Simulated Microcalcifications in Full-Field Digital Mammography, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, and Synthetically Reconstructed 2-Dimensional Images Performed With 2 Different Digital X-ray Mammography Systems.
Peters S; Hellmich M; Stork A; Kemper J; Grinstein O; Püsken M; Stahlhut L; Kinner S; Maintz D; Krug KB
Invest Radiol; 2017 Apr; 52(4):206-215. PubMed ID: 27861206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Microcalcifications Detected at Screening Mammography: Synthetic Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus Digital Mammography.
Lai YC; Ray KM; Lee AY; Hayward JH; Freimanis RI; Lobach IV; Joe BN
Radiology; 2018 Dec; 289(3):630-638. PubMed ID: 30277445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. How does c-view image quality compare with conventional 2D FFDM?
Nelson JS; Wells JR; Baker JA; Samei E
Med Phys; 2016 May; 43(5):2538. PubMed ID: 27147364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images.
Skaane P; Bandos AI; Eben EB; Jebsen IN; Krager M; Haakenaasen U; Ekseth U; Izadi M; Hofvind S; Gullien R
Radiology; 2014 Jun; 271(3):655-63. PubMed ID: 24484063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Assessing task performance in FFDM, DBT, and synthetic mammography using uniform and anthropomorphic physical phantoms.
Ikejimba LC; Glick SJ; Choudhury KR; Samei E; Lo JY
Med Phys; 2016 Oct; 43(10):5593. PubMed ID: 27782687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of full-field digital mammograms versus 2D synthesized mammograms for detection of microcalcifications on screening.
Wahab RA; Lee SJ; Zhang B; Sobel L; Mahoney MC
Eur J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 107():14-19. PubMed ID: 30292258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A four-alternative forced choice (4AFC) methodology for evaluating microcalcification detection in clinical full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) systems using an inkjet-printed anthropomorphic phantom.
Ikejimba LC; Salad J; Graff CG; Ghammraoui B; Cheng WC; Lo JY; Glick SJ
Med Phys; 2019 Sep; 46(9):3883-3892. PubMed ID: 31135960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Synthesized Two-Dimensional Images versus Full-Field Digital Mammography for Population Screening: Outcomes from the Verona Screening Program.
Caumo F; Zorzi M; Brunelli S; Romanucci G; Rella R; Cugola L; Bricolo P; Fedato C; Montemezzi S; Houssami N
Radiology; 2018 Apr; 287(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 29237146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Comparison of full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis on assessment of the lesions in dense breast: a preliminary study].
Li Y; Ye ZX; Wu T; An YH; Liu PF; Bao RX
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2013 Jan; 35(1):33-7. PubMed ID: 23648297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The simulation of 3D microcalcification clusters in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
Shaheen E; Van Ongeval C; Zanca F; Cockmartin L; Marshall N; Jacobs J; Young KC; R Dance D; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6659-71. PubMed ID: 22149848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Performance of 2D Synthetic Mammography Versus Digital Mammography in the Detection of Microcalcifications at Screening.
Dodelzon K; Simon K; Dou E; Levy AD; Michaels AY; Askin G; Katzen JT
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Jun; 214(6):1436-1444. PubMed ID: 32255687
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison between two-dimensional synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of T1 breast cancer.
Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Ko ES; Hahn SY; Shin JH; Kim MJ
Eur Radiol; 2016 Aug; 26(8):2538-46. PubMed ID: 26628063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis with a wide scan angle compared to full-field digital mammography for the detection and characterization of microcalcifications.
Clauser P; Nagl G; Helbich TH; Pinker-Domenig K; Weber M; Kapetas P; Bernathova M; Baltzer PAT
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Dec; 85(12):2161-2168. PubMed ID: 27842661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of diagnostic performances in the evaluation of breast microcalcifications: synthetic mammography versus full-field digital mammography.
Kilic P; Sendur HN; Gultekin S; Gultekin II; Cindil E; Cerit M
Ir J Med Sci; 2022 Aug; 191(4):1891-1897. PubMed ID: 34472041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dose reduction in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening using synthetically reconstructed projection images: an observer performance study.
Gur D; Zuley ML; Anello MI; Rathfon GY; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Hakim CM; Wallace L; Lu A; Bandos AI
Acad Radiol; 2012 Feb; 19(2):166-71. PubMed ID: 22098941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Full-field digital mammography: a phantom study for detection of microcalcification].
Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Schorn C; Funke M; Fischer U; Grabbe E
Rofo; 2000 Jul; 172(7):646-50. PubMed ID: 10962993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Magnification mammography: a comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for the detection of simulated small masses and microcalcifications.
Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Funke M; Grabbe EH
Eur Radiol; 2002 Sep; 12(9):2188-91. PubMed ID: 12195468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of synthetic mammography, reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis, and digital mammography: evaluation of lesion conspicuity and BI-RADS assessment categories.
Mariscotti G; Durando M; Houssami N; Fasciano M; Tagliafico A; Bosco D; Casella C; Bogetti C; Bergamasco L; Fonio P; Gandini G
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Dec; 166(3):765-773. PubMed ID: 28819781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Quantitative analysis of radiation dosage and image quality between digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with two-dimensional synthetic mammography and full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
Choi Y; Woo OH; Shin HS; Cho KR; Seo BK; Choi GY
Clin Imaging; 2019; 55():12-17. PubMed ID: 30703693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
