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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

402 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28153022)

  • 1. Radiation dose affected by mammographic composition and breast size: first application of a radiation dose management system for full-field digital mammography in Korean women.
    Baek JE; Kang BJ; Kim SH; Lee HS
    World J Surg Oncol; 2017 Feb; 15(1):38. PubMed ID: 28153022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Breast Radiation Dose With CESM Compared With 2D FFDM and 3D Tomosynthesis Mammography.
    James JR; Pavlicek W; Hanson JA; Boltz TF; Patel BK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Feb; 208(2):362-372. PubMed ID: 28112559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose.
    Berns EA; Hendrick RE; Cutter GR
    Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):334-40. PubMed ID: 12674233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial.
    Hendrick RE; Pisano ED; Averbukh A; Moran C; Berns EA; Yaffe MJ; Herman B; Acharyya S; Gatsonis C
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Feb; 194(2):362-9. PubMed ID: 20093597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiation exposure of digital breast tomosynthesis using an antiscatter grid compared with full-field digital mammography.
    Paulis LE; Lobbes MB; Lalji UC; Gelissen N; Bouwman RW; Wildberger JE; Jeukens CR
    Invest Radiol; 2015 Oct; 50(10):679-85. PubMed ID: 26011823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Technique factors and their relationship to radiation dose in pendant geometry breast CT.
    Boone JM; Kwan AL; Seibert JA; Shah N; Lindfors KK; Nelson TR
    Med Phys; 2005 Dec; 32(12):3767-76. PubMed ID: 16475776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Automated Breast Density Computation in Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Influence on Mean Glandular Dose and BIRADS Density Categorization.
    Castillo-García M; Chevalier M; Garayoa J; Rodriguez-Ruiz A; García-Pinto D; Valverde J
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Jul; 24(7):802-810. PubMed ID: 28214227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Patient dose in digital mammography.
    Chevalier M; Morán P; Ten JI; Fernández Soto JM; Cepeda T; Vañó E
    Med Phys; 2004 Sep; 31(9):2471-9. PubMed ID: 15487727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mismatch in breast and detector size during screening and diagnostic mammography results in increased patient radiation dose.
    Wells CL; Slanetz PJ; Rosen MP
    Acad Radiol; 2014 Jan; 21(1):99-103. PubMed ID: 24331271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A survey of patient dose and clinical factors in a full-field digital mammography system.
    Morán P; Chevalier M; Ten JI; Fernández Soto JM; Vañó E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):375-9. PubMed ID: 15933140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography.
    Chae EY; Kim HH; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ
    Br J Radiol; 2016 Jun; 89(1062):20150743. PubMed ID: 27072391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical digital breast tomosynthesis system: dosimetric characterization.
    Feng SS; Sechopoulos I
    Radiology; 2012 Apr; 263(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 22332070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The Effect of Breast Size and Density in Turkish Women on Radiation Dose in Full-Field Digital Mammography.
    İdil Soylu A; Öztürk M; Polat AV
    Eur J Breast Health; 2021 Oct; 17(4):315-321. PubMed ID: 34651109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Threshold in breast compression reduction for full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Afandy AN; Tori MB; Bintalib SO; Soh BLP
    Radiography (Lond); 2024 Jan; 30(1):217-225. PubMed ID: 38035436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of radiologist performance with photon-counting full-field digital mammography to conventional full-field digital mammography.
    Cole EB; Toledano AY; Lundqvist M; Pisano ED
    Acad Radiol; 2012 Aug; 19(8):916-22. PubMed ID: 22537503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Average glandular dose in paired digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis acquisitions in a population based screening program: effects of measuring breast density, air kerma and beam quality.
    Østerås BH; Skaane P; Gullien R; Martinsen ACT
    Phys Med Biol; 2018 Jan; 63(3):035006. PubMed ID: 29311416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
    Francescone MA; Jochelson MS; Dershaw DD; Sung JS; Hughes MC; Zheng J; Moskowitz C; Morris EA
    Eur J Radiol; 2014 Aug; 83(8):1350-5. PubMed ID: 24932846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Radiation dose with digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography: per-view analysis.
    Gennaro G; Bernardi D; Houssami N
    Eur Radiol; 2018 Feb; 28(2):573-581. PubMed ID: 28819862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.