399 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. 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]
15. 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]
16. 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]
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]
