554 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28683503)
1. Focal Breast Lesions in Clinical CT Examinations of the Chest: A Retrospective Analysis.
Krug KB; Houbois C; Grinstein O; Borggrefe J; Puesken M; Hanstein B; Malter W; Maintz D; Hellmich M
Rofo; 2017 Oct; 189(10):977-989. PubMed ID: 28683503
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Incidental detection of clinically unexpected breast lesions by computed tomography.
Monzawa S; Washio T; Yasuoka R; Mitsuo M; Kadotani Y; Hanioka K
Acta Radiol; 2013 May; 54(4):374-9. PubMed ID: 23395815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Characteristics, Malignancy Rate, and Follow-up of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Identified at Breast MR Imaging: Implications for MR Image Interpretation and Management.
Chikarmane SA; Birdwell RL; Poole PS; Sippo DA; Giess CS
Radiology; 2016 Sep; 280(3):707-15. PubMed ID: 27089027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Breast tomosynthesis for the clarification of mammographic BI-RADS 3 lesions can decrease follow-up examinations and enables immediate cancer diagnosis.
Bahrs SD; Otto V; Hattermann V; Klumpp B; Hahn M; Nikolaou K; Siegmann-Luz K
Acta Radiol; 2018 Oct; 59(10):1176-1183. PubMed ID: 29451022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Outcomes of unconventional utilization of BI-RADS category 3 assessment at opportunistic screening.
Altas H; Tureli D; Cengic I; Kucukkaya F; Aribal E; Kaya H
Acta Radiol; 2016 Nov; 57(11):1304-1309. PubMed ID: 26019241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Computer-Aided Diagnosis in Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening of Women With Extremely Dense Breasts to Reduce False-Positive Diagnoses.
Verburg E; van Gils CH; Bakker MF; Viergever MA; Pijnappel RM; Veldhuis WB; Gilhuijs KGA
Invest Radiol; 2020 Jul; 55(7):438-444. PubMed ID: 32149858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Role of combined BI-RADS assessment using mammography and sonography for evaluation of incidental hypermetabolic lesions in the breast on 18F-FDG PET-CT.
Lim S; Lee EH; Park JM; Chang YW; Kim HH; Jeong SH
Acta Radiol; 2013 Dec; 54(10):1117-24. PubMed ID: 23864064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Diagnostic mammography and sonography: concordance of the breast imaging reporting assessments and final clinical outcome].
Lorenzen J; Wedel AK; Lisboa BW; Löning T; Adam G
Rofo; 2005 Nov; 177(11):1545-51. PubMed ID: 16302136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41.
Hooley RJ; Greenberg KL; Stackhouse RM; Geisel JL; Butler RS; Philpotts LE
Radiology; 2012 Oct; 265(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 22723501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Evaluation of the results after using of the BI-RADS categories in 1,777 clinical mammograms].
Hauth EA; Khan K; Wolfgarten B; Betzler A; Kimmig R; Forsting M
Radiologe; 2008 Mar; 48(3):281-8. PubMed ID: 17265008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. False-positive findings at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: a BI-RADS descriptor study.
Baltzer PA; Benndorf M; Dietzel M; Gajda M; Runnebaum IB; Kaiser WA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Jun; 194(6):1658-63. PubMed ID: 20489110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Intramammary incidental findings on staging computer tomography.
Surov A; Fiedler E; Wienke A; Holzhausen HJ; Spielmann RP; Behrmann C
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81(9):2174-8. PubMed ID: 21742452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. BI-RADS Category 3 Comparison: Probably Benign Category after Recall from Screening before and after Implementation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
McDonald ES; McCarthy AM; Weinstein SP; Schnall MD; Conant EF
Radiology; 2017 Dec; 285(3):778-787. PubMed ID: 28715278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of the applicability of BI-RADS® MRI for the interpretation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
Travieso-Aja MM; Maldonado-Saluzzi D; Naranjo-Santana P; Fernández-Ruiz C; Severino-Rondón W; Rodríguez Rodríguez M; Luzardo OP
Radiologia (Engl Ed); 2019; 61(6):477-488. PubMed ID: 31262509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK
Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Frequency and Cancer Yield of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Detected at High-Risk Screening Breast MRI.
Edmonds CE; Lamb LR; Mercaldo SF; Sippo DA; Burk KS; Lehman CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Feb; 214(2):240-248. PubMed ID: 31799867
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Screening breast MR imaging: comparison of interpretation of baseline and annual follow-up studies.
Abramovici G; Mainiero MB
Radiology; 2011 Apr; 259(1):85-91. PubMed ID: 21285337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions.
Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Padula S; Altomari F; Moriconi E; Pronio AM; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
Radiology; 2007 Jun; 243(3):670-80. PubMed ID: 17446524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison between incidental malignant and benign breast lesions detected by computed tomography: a systematic review.
Bach AG; Abbas J; Jasaabuu C; Schramm D; Wienke A; Surov A
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2013 Oct; 57(5):529-33. PubMed ID: 24119265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
