85 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28436856)
1. Task-Based Modeling of a 5k Ultra-High-Resolution Medical Imaging System for Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Kanicki J
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2017 Sep; 36(9):1820-1831. PubMed ID: 28436856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Three-dimensional cascaded system analysis of a 50 µm pixel pitch wafer-scale CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray detector for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Vassiljev N; Konstantinidis AC; Speller RD; Kanicki J
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Mar; 62(5):1994-2017. PubMed ID: 28072394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Large area CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray imager for digital breast tomosynthesis: Analysis, modeling, and characterization.
Zhao C; Kanicki J; Konstantinidis AC; Patel T
Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 42(11):6294-308. PubMed ID: 26520722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 50 μm pixel pitch wafer-scale CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray detector for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Konstantinidis AC; Zheng Y; Anaxagoras T; Speller RD; Kanicki J
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Dec; 60(23):8977-9001. PubMed ID: 26540090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Amorphous In-Ga-Zn-O thin-film transistor active pixel sensor x-ray imager for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Kanicki J
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091902. PubMed ID: 25186389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cascaded systems analysis of a-Se/a-Si and a-InGaZnO TFT passive and active pixel sensors for tomosynthesis.
Sengupta A; Zhao C; Konstantinidis A; Kanicki J
Phys Med Biol; 2019 Jan; 64(2):025012. PubMed ID: 30523916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. How Does the Display Luminance Level Affect Detectability of Breast Microcalcifications and Spiculated Lesions in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) Images?
Ferranti C; Primolevo A; Cartia F; Cavatorta C; Ciniselli CM; Lualdi M; Meroni S; Pignoli E; Plebani M; Siciliano C; Verderio P; Scaperrotta G
Acad Radiol; 2017 Jul; 24(7):795-801. PubMed ID: 28189505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Detectability comparison of simulated tumors in digital breast tomosynthesis using high-energy X-ray inline phase sensitive and commercial imaging systems.
Ghani MU; Wong MD; Omoumi FH; Zheng B; Fajardo LL; Yan A; Wu X; Liu H
Phys Med; 2018 Mar; 47():34-41. PubMed ID: 29609816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effect of amorphous selenium detector thickness on dual-energy digital breast imaging.
Hu YH; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2014 Nov; 41(11):111904. PubMed ID: 25370637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Multiscale bilateral filtering for improving image quality in digital breast tomosynthesis.
Lu Y; Chan HP; Wei J; Hadjiiski LM; Samala RK
Med Phys; 2015 Jan; 42(1):182-95. PubMed ID: 25563259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Optimization of contrast-enhanced breast imaging: Analysis using a cascaded linear system model.
Hu YH; Scaduto DA; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2017 Jan; 44(1):43-56. PubMed ID: 28044312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Importance of point-by-point back projection correction for isocentric motion in digital breast tomosynthesis: relevance to morphology of structures such as microcalcifications.
Chen Y; Lo JY; Dobbins JT
Med Phys; 2007 Oct; 34(10):3885-92. PubMed ID: 17985634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Empirical electro-optical and x-ray performance evaluation of CMOS active pixels sensor for low dose, high resolution x-ray medical imaging.
Arvanitis CD; Bohndiek SE; Royle G; Blue A; Liang HX; Clark A; Prydderch M; Turchetta R; Speller R
Med Phys; 2007 Dec; 34(12):4612-25. PubMed ID: 18196789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Performance of Photon-Counting Breast Computed Tomography, Digital Mammography, and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Evaluating Breast Specimens.
Rößler AC; Kalender W; Kolditz D; Steiding C; Ruth V; Preuss C; Peter SC; Brehm B; Hammon M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E
Acad Radiol; 2017 Feb; 24(2):184-190. PubMed ID: 27888024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Experimental characterization of a direct conversion amorphous selenium detector with thicker conversion layer for dual-energy contrast-enhanced breast imaging.
Scaduto DA; Tousignant O; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2017 Aug; 44(8):3965-3977. PubMed ID: 28543761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Segmented separable footprint projector for digital breast tomosynthesis and its application for subpixel reconstruction.
Zheng J; Fessler JA; Chan HP
Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 44(3):986-1001. PubMed ID: 28058719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Task-based performance analysis of FBP, SART and ML for digital breast tomosynthesis using signal CNR and Channelised Hotelling Observers.
Van de Sompel D; Brady SM; Boone J
Med Image Anal; 2011 Feb; 15(1):53-70. PubMed ID: 20713313
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Full Field Digital Mammography (FFDM) versus CMOS Technology versus Tomosynthesis (DBT) - Which System Increases the Quality of Intraoperative Imaging?
Schulz-Wendtland R; Dilbat G; Bani M; Fasching PA; Lux MP; Wenkel E; Schwab S; Loehberg CR; Jud SM; Rauh C; Bayer CM; Beckmann MW; Uder M; Meier-Meitinger M
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd; 2012 Jun; 72(6):532-538. PubMed ID: 26640287
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
