286 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29315061)
1. ACR BI-RADS Assessment Category 4 Subdivisions in Diagnostic Mammography: Utilization and Outcomes in the National Mammography Database.
Elezaby M; Li G; Bhargavan-Chatfield M; Burnside ES; DeMartini WB
Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):416-422. PubMed ID: 29315061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Utility of BI-RADS Assessment Category 4 Subdivisions for Screening Breast MRI.
Strigel RM; Burnside ES; Elezaby M; Fowler AM; Kelcz F; Salkowski LR; DeMartini WB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jun; 208(6):1392-1399. PubMed ID: 28792802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Tomosynthesis in the Diagnostic Setting: Changing Rates of BI-RADS Final Assessment over Time.
Raghu M; Durand MA; Andrejeva L; Goehler A; Michalski MH; Geisel JL; Hooley RJ; Horvath LJ; Butler R; Forman HP; Philpotts LE
Radiology; 2016 Oct; 281(1):54-61. PubMed ID: 27139264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cancer Yield and Patterns of Follow-up for BI-RADS Category 3 after Screening Mammography Recall in the National Mammography Database.
Berg WA; Berg JM; Sickles EA; Burnside ES; Zuley ML; Rosenberg RD; Lee CS
Radiology; 2020 Jul; 296(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 32427557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Utilization and Cancer Yield of Probably Benign Assessment Category in the National Mammography Database: 2009 to 2018.
Elezaby MA; Mao L; Burnside ES; Zuley ML; Berg WA; Bhargavan-Chatfield M; Lee CS
J Am Coll Radiol; 2022 May; 19(5):604-614. PubMed ID: 35358482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.
Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS
Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of the positive predictive value (PPV3) of ACR BI-RADS category 4 and 5 based on the outcomes of Invasive Diagnostic Office in an outpatient clinic.
KozieĊek K; Stranz-Walczak N; Gajdzis P; Karmelita-Katulska K
Pol J Radiol; 2019; 84():e185-e189. PubMed ID: 31481989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories.
Bent CK; Bassett LW; D'Orsi CJ; Sayre JW
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 May; 194(5):1378-83. PubMed ID: 20410428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Does patient age affect the PPV
Hu Y; Yang Y; Gu R; Jin L; Shen S; Liu F; Wang H; Mei J; Jiang X; Liu Q; Su F
Eur Radiol; 2018 Jun; 28(6):2492-2498. PubMed ID: 29302783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Prediction for Breast Cancer in BI-RADS Category 4 Lesion Categorized by Age and Breast Composition of Women in Songklanagarind Hospital.
Noonpradej S; Wangkulangkul P; Woodtichartpreecha P; Laohawiriyakamol S
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2021 Feb; 22(2):531-536. PubMed ID: 33639670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Value of the US BI-RADS final assessment following mastectomy: BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions.
Gweon HM; Son EJ; Youk JH; Kim JA; Chung J
Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):255-60. PubMed ID: 22302210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Use of BI-RADS 3-probably benign category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial.
Baum JK; Hanna LG; Acharyya S; Mahoney MC; Conant EF; Bassett LW; Pisano ED
Radiology; 2011 Jul; 260(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 21502382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. The Utility of the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Ultrasound Lexicon in Category 4 Breast Lesions: A Prospective Multicenter Study in China.
Gu Y; Tian JW; Ran HT; Ren WD; Chang C; Yuan JJ; Kang CS; Deng YB; Wang H; Luo BM; Guo SL; Zhou Q; Xue ES; Zhan WW; Zhou Q; Li J; Zhou P; Zhang CQ; Chen M; Gu Y; Xu JF; Chen W; Zhang YH; Wang HQ; Li JC; Wang HY; Jiang YX
Acad Radiol; 2022 Jan; 29 Suppl 1():S26-S34. PubMed ID: 32768352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy and Efficiency of Categories 4 and 5 of the Second Edition of the BI-RADS Ultrasound Lexicon in Diagnosing Breast Lesions.
Zou X; Wang J; Lan X; Lin Q; Han F; Liu L; Li A
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2016 Sep; 42(9):2065-71. PubMed ID: 27262521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [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]
19. The value of breast MRI for BI-RADS category 4B mammographic microcalcification: based on the 5
Eun NL; Son EJ; Gweon HM; Youk JH; Kim JA
Clin Radiol; 2018 Aug; 73(8):750-755. PubMed ID: 29853301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
