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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28334617)

  • 1. Comparison of two-dimensional synthesized mammogram (2DSM) and conventional full-field digital mammogram (FFDM) for evaluation of breast cancer.
    Choi G; Woo OH; Shin HS; Jang S; Cho KR; Seo BK
    Clin Imaging; 2017; 43():170-174. PubMed ID: 28334617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: comparison of the accuracy of lesion measurement and characterization using specimens.
    Seo N; Kim HH; Shin HJ; Cha JH; Kim H; Moon JH; Gong G; Ahn SH; Son BH
    Acta Radiol; 2014 Jul; 55(6):661-7. PubMed ID: 24005560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Image quality, lesion detection, and diagnostic efficacy in digital mammography: full-field digital mammography versus computed radiography-based mammography using digital storage phosphor plates.
    Schueller G; Riedl CC; Mallek R; Eibenberger K; Langenberger H; Kaindl E; Kulinna-Cosentini C; Rudas M; Helbich TH
    Eur J Radiol; 2008 Sep; 67(3):487-96. PubMed ID: 17890036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography with new reconstruction and new processing for dose reduction.
    Endo T; Morita T; Oiwa M; Suda N; Sato Y; Ichihara S; Shiraiwa M; Yoshikawa K; Horiba T; Ogawa H; Hayashi Y; Sendai T; Arai T
    Breast Cancer; 2018 Mar; 25(2):159-166. PubMed ID: 28956298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative analysis between synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for breast cancer detection and visibility.
    Murakami R; Uchiyama N; Tani H; Yoshida T; Kumita S
    Eur J Radiol Open; 2020; 7():100207. PubMed ID: 33102630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Diagnostic Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with the Two-Dimensional Synthesized Mammogram for Suspicious Breast Microcalcifications Compared to Full-Field Digital Mammography in Stereotactic Breast Biopsy.
    Shin J; Woo OH; Shin HS; Song SE; Cho KR; Seo BK
    J Korean Soc Radiol; 2022 Sep; 83(5):1090-1103. PubMed ID: 36276204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Synthesized Digital Mammography Imaging.
    Freer PE; Winkler N
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2017 May; 55(3):503-512. PubMed ID: 28411676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography-Which modality provides more accurate prediction of margin status in specimen radiography?
    Amer HA; Schmitzberger F; Ingold-Heppner B; Kussmaul J; El Tohamy MF; Tantawy HI; Hamm B; Makowski M; Fallenberg EM
    Eur J Radiol; 2017 Aug; 93():258-264. PubMed ID: 28668424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Impact of full field digital mammography on the classification and mammographic characteristics of interval breast cancers.
    Knox M; O'Brien A; Szabó E; Smith CS; Fenlon HM; McNicholas MM; Flanagan FL
    Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jun; 84(6):1056-61. PubMed ID: 25816990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessing tumor extent on contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus full-field digital mammography and ultrasound.
    Patel BK; Garza SA; Eversman S; Lopez-Alvarez Y; Kosiorek H; Pockaj BA
    Clin Imaging; 2017; 46():78-84. PubMed ID: 28750354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical implementation of synthesized mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis in a routine clinical practice.
    Freer PE; Riegert J; Eisenmenger L; Ose D; Winkler N; Stein MA; Stoddard GJ; Hess R
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Nov; 166(2):501-509. PubMed ID: 28780702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study.
    Gur D; Abrams GS; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Hakim CM; Perrin RL; Rathfon GY; Sumkin JH; Zuley ML; Bandos AI
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Aug; 193(2):586-91. PubMed ID: 19620460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. A new full-field digital mammography system with and without the use of an advanced post-processing algorithm: comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance.
    Ahn HS; Kim SM; Jang M; Yun BL; Kim B; Ko ES; Han BK; Chang JM; Yi A; Cho N; Moon WK; Choi HY
    Korean J Radiol; 2014; 15(3):305-12. PubMed ID: 24843234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.