230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29275941)
1. Breast Imaging Outcomes following Abnormal Thermography.
Neal CH; Flynt KA; Jeffries DO; Helvie MA
Acad Radiol; 2018 Mar; 25(3):273-278. PubMed ID: 29275941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of abnormal mammography results and palpable breast abnormalities.
Kerlikowske K; Smith-Bindman R; Ljung BM; Grady D
Ann Intern Med; 2003 Aug; 139(4):274-84. PubMed ID: 12965983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses.
Chan CH; Coopey SB; Freer PE; Hughes KS
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Oct; 153(3):699-702. PubMed ID: 26341750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast as a problem-solving method: to be or not to be?
Oztekin PS; Kosar PN
Breast J; 2014; 20(6):622-31. PubMed ID: 25200378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Palpable breast abnormalities in women under age 40.
Lee MV; Shaw HL; Chi T; Brazeal HA; Holley SO; Appleton CM
Breast J; 2018 Sep; 24(5):798-805. PubMed ID: 29687544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. BI-RADS Category 5 Assessments at Diagnostic Breast Imaging:Outcomes Analysis Based on Lesion Descriptors.
Yao MM; Joe BN; Sickles EA; Lee CS
Acad Radiol; 2019 Aug; 26(8):1048-1052. PubMed ID: 30195413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Neddle-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of non-palpable breast cancer].
Becerra-Alcántara GI; Círigo-Villagómez LL; Ramos-Medina F; Robledo-Martínez H; Mar-Merinos CG; Panzi-Altamirano RM
Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2015 Jul; 83(7):400-7. PubMed ID: 26422910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Reassessment and Follow-Up Results of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Detected on Screening Breast Ultrasound.
Chae EY; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ; Kim HH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Mar; 206(3):666-72. PubMed ID: 26901026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Positive predictive value of breast cancer in the lesions categorized as BI-RADS category 5.
Wiratkapun C; Lertsithichai P; Wibulpholprasert B
J Med Assoc Thai; 2006 Aug; 89(8):1253-9. PubMed ID: 17048437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. How reassuring is a normal breast ultrasound in assessment of a screen-detected mammographic abnormality? A review of interval cancers after assessment that included ultrasound evaluation.
Bennett ML; Welman CJ; Celliers LM
Clin Radiol; 2011 Oct; 66(10):928-39. PubMed ID: 21718976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In the Setting of Negative Mammogram, Is Additional Breast Ultrasound Necessary for Evaluation of Breast Pain?
Mema E; Cho E; Ryu YK; Jadeja P; Wynn R; Taback B; Ha R
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol; 2019; 48(2):117-120. PubMed ID: 29402490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Outcome of men presenting with clinical breast problems: the role of mammography and ultrasound.
Patterson SK; Helvie MA; Aziz K; Nees AV
Breast J; 2006; 12(5):418-23. PubMed ID: 16958958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Automated Breast Ultrasound in Breast Cancer Screening of Women With Dense Breasts: Reader Study of Mammography-Negative and Mammography-Positive Cancers.
Giger ML; Inciardi MF; Edwards A; Papaioannou J; Drukker K; Jiang Y; Brem R; Brown JB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Jun; 206(6):1341-50. PubMed ID: 27043979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Linked claims and medical records for cancer case management : evaluation of mammography abnormalities.
Eberl MM; Watroba N; Reinhardt M; Pomerantz J; Serghany J; Broffman G; Fox CH; Mahoney MC; Edge SB
Cancer; 2007 Aug; 110(3):518-24. PubMed ID: 17577210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Surveillance of probably benign (BI-RADS 3) lesions in mammography: what is the right follow-up protocol?
Buch KA; Qureshi MM; Carpentier B; Cunningham DA; Stone M; Jaffe C; Quinn M; Gonzalez C; LaVoye J; Hines N; Bloch BN
Breast J; 2015; 21(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 25669425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Can artificial intelligence replace ultrasound as a complementary tool to mammogram for the diagnosis of the breast cancer?
Mansour S; Kamal R; Hashem L; AlKalaawy B
Br J Radiol; 2021 Dec; 94(1128):20210820. PubMed ID: 34613796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Impact of Second-Opinion Interpretation of Breast Imaging Studies in Patients Not Currently Diagnosed With Breast Cancer.
Chang Sen LQ; Mayo RC; Lesslie MD; Yang WT; Leung JWT
J Am Coll Radiol; 2018 Jul; 15(7):980-987.e1. PubMed ID: 29789230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Predictive value of BI-RADS classification for breast imaging in women under age 50.
Kennedy G; Markert M; Alexander JR; Avisar E
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 Dec; 130(3):819-23. PubMed ID: 21748292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
