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.
386 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28750354)
21. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus MRI as an Adjunct to Full-Field Digital Mammography for Preoperative Evaluation of Breast Cancer according to Mammographic Density. Kim H; Yang SY; Ahn JH; Ko EY; Ko ES; Han BK; Choi JS Korean J Radiol; 2022 Nov; 23(11):1031-1043. PubMed ID: 36126953 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Single Center Evaluation of Comparative Breast Radiation dose of Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM), Digital Mammography (DM) and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT). Bicchierai G; Busoni S; Tortoli P; Bettarini S; Naro FD; De Benedetto D; Savi E; Bellini C; Miele V; Nori J Acad Radiol; 2022 Sep; 29(9):1342-1349. PubMed ID: 35065889 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Which clinical, radiological, histological, and molecular parameters are associated with the absence of enhancement of known breast cancers with Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM)? Bicchierai G; Amato F; Vanzi B; De Benedetto D; Boeri C; Vanzi E; Di Naro F; Bianchi S; Cirone D; Cozzi D; Miele V; Nori J Breast; 2020 Dec; 54():15-24. PubMed ID: 32889303 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Use of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for intramammary cancer staging: preliminary results. Blum KS; Rubbert C; Mathys B; Antoch G; Mohrmann S; Obenauer S Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1363-9. PubMed ID: 25127846 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Comparison of the Mammography, Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography and Ultrasonography in a Group of 116 patients. Luczyńska E; Heinze S; Adamczyk A; Rys J; Mitus JW; Hendrick E Anticancer Res; 2016 Aug; 36(8):4359-66. PubMed ID: 27466557 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging. Pertuz S; McDonald ES; Weinstein SP; Conant EF; Kontos D Radiology; 2016 Apr; 279(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 26491909 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer. Sung JS; Lebron L; Keating D; D'Alessio D; Comstock CE; Lee CH; Pike MC; Ayhan M; Moskowitz CS; Morris EA; Jochelson MS Radiology; 2019 Oct; 293(1):81-88. PubMed ID: 31453765 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Digital breast tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography alone and in combination compared to 2D digital synthetized mammography and MR imaging in breast cancer detection and classification. Petrillo A; Fusco R; Vallone P; Filice S; Granata V; Petrosino T; Rosaria Rubulotta M; Setola SV; Mattace Raso M; Maio F; Raiano C; Siani C; Di Bonito M; Botti G Breast J; 2020 May; 26(5):860-872. PubMed ID: 31886607 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Evaluation of low-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography images by comparing them to full-field digital mammography using EUREF image quality criteria. Lalji UC; Jeukens CR; Houben I; Nelemans PJ; van Engen RE; van Wylick E; Beets-Tan RG; Wildberger JE; Paulis LE; Lobbes MB Eur Radiol; 2015 Oct; 25(10):2813-20. PubMed ID: 25813015 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparison of screening CEDM and MRI for women at increased risk for breast cancer: A pilot study. Jochelson MS; Pinker K; Dershaw DD; Hughes M; Gibbons GF; Rahbar K; Robson ME; Mangino DA; Goldman D; Moskowitz CS; Morris EA; Sung JS Eur J Radiol; 2017 Dec; 97():37-43. PubMed ID: 29153365 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography in Women With Intermediate Breast Cancer Risk and Dense Breasts. Sorin V; Yagil Y; Yosepovich A; Shalmon A; Gotlieb M; Neiman OH; Sklair-Levy M AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Nov; 211(5):W267-W274. PubMed ID: 30240292 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Assessment of extent of breast cancer: comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography. Mun HS; Kim HH; Shin HJ; Cha JH; Ruppel PL; Oh HY; Chae EY Clin Radiol; 2013 Dec; 68(12):1254-9. PubMed ID: 23969151 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography Screening for Intermediate-Risk Women With a History of Lobular Neoplasia. Hogan MP; Amir T; Sevilimedu V; Sung J; Morris EA; Jochelson MS AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Jun; 216(6):1486-1491. PubMed ID: 33787291 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM) Helps to Safely Reduce Benign Breast Biopsies for Low to Moderately Suspicious Soft Tissue Lesions. Zuley ML; Bandos AI; Abrams GS; Ganott MA; Gizienski TA; Hakim CM; Kelly AE; Nair BE; Sumkin JH; Waheed U; Gur D Acad Radiol; 2020 Jul; 27(7):969-976. PubMed ID: 31495761 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Comparison between cone-beam breast-CT and full-field digital mammography for microcalcification detection depending on breast density. Wienbeck S; Andrijevska V; Kück F; Perske C; Unterberg-Buchwald C; Fischer U; Lotz J; Kunze M Medicine (Baltimore); 2023 Jun; 102(22):e33900. PubMed ID: 37266644 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Current Status of Contrast Enhanced Mammography: A Comprehensive Review. Kornecki A Can Assoc Radiol J; 2022 Feb; 73(1):141-156. PubMed ID: 34492211 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Focal Breast Pain: Does Breast Density Affect the Need for Ultrasound? Cho MW; Grimm LJ; Johnson KS Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):53-59. PubMed ID: 27746121 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. 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]
40. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation. Fallenberg EM; Schmitzberger FF; Amer H; Ingold-Heppner B; Balleyguier C; Diekmann F; Engelken F; Mann RM; Renz DM; Bick U; Hamm B; Dromain C Eur Radiol; 2017 Jul; 27(7):2752-2764. PubMed ID: 27896471 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]