330 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29338316)
1. Retroareolar masses and intraductal abnormalities detected on screening ultrasound: can biopsy be avoided?
Guo Y; Raghu M; Durand M; Hooley R
Br J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 91(1090):20170816. PubMed ID: 29338316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Diagnostic value of breast ultrasound in mammography BI-RADS 0 and clinically indeterminate or suspicious of malignancy breast lesions.
Dobrosavljević A; Rakić S; Nikoli B; Raznatović SJ; Dikić SD; Milosević Z; Jurisić A; Skrobić M
Vojnosanit Pregl; 2016 Mar; 73(3):239-45. PubMed ID: 27295907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Automated breast ultrasound: lesion detection and BI-RADS classification--a pilot study.
Wenkel E; Heckmann M; Heinrich M; Schwab SA; Uder M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Bautz WA; Janka R
Rofo; 2008 Sep; 180(9):804-8. PubMed ID: 18704878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Predictors of Invasive Breast Cancer in Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Ultrasound-Guided Core Needle Biopsy.
Shin YJ; Kim SM; Yun B; Jang M; Kim B; Lee SH
J Ultrasound Med; 2019 Feb; 38(2):481-488. PubMed ID: 30069893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Follow-Up Intervals for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 Lesions on Screening Ultrasound in Screening and Tertiary Referral Centers.
Huh S; Suh HJ; Kim EK; Kim MJ; Yoon JH; Park VY; Moon HJ
Korean J Radiol; 2020 Sep; 21(9):1027-1035. PubMed ID: 32691538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Probably benign lesions at screening breast US in a population with elevated risk: prevalence and rate of malignancy in the ACRIN 6666 trial.
Barr RG; Zhang Z; Cormack JB; Mendelson EB; Berg WA
Radiology; 2013 Dec; 269(3):701-12. PubMed ID: 23962417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Application of the downgrade criteria to supplemental screening ultrasound for women with negative mammography but dense breasts.
Kim SY; Kim MJ; Moon HJ; Yoon JH; Kim EK
Medicine (Baltimore); 2016 Nov; 95(44):e5279. PubMed ID: 27858896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Kaiser score reliably excludes malignancy in benign contrast-enhancing lesions classified as BI-RADS 4 on breast MRI high-risk screening exams.
Milos RI; Pipan F; Kalovidouri A; Clauser P; Kapetas P; Bernathova M; Helbich TH; Baltzer PAT
Eur Radiol; 2020 Nov; 30(11):6052-6061. PubMed ID: 32504098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risk of malignancy in palpable solid breast masses considered probably benign or low suspicion: implications for management.
Giess CS; Smeglin LZ; Meyer JE; Ritner JA; Birdwell RL
J Ultrasound Med; 2012 Dec; 31(12):1943-9. PubMed ID: 23197547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Nonpalpable BI-RADS 4 breast lesions: sonographic findings and pathology correlation.
Elverici E; Barça AN; Aktaş H; Özsoy A; Zengin B; Çavuşoğlu M; Araz L
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2015; 21(3):189-94. PubMed ID: 25835079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Stereotactic Mammotome breast biopsy: routine clinical experience and correlation with BI-RADS--classification and histopathology].
Michel SC; Löw R; Singer G; Otto R; Hohl M; Kubik RA
Praxis (Bern 1994); 2007 Sep; 96(39):1459-74. PubMed ID: 17966279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Simplifying Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System classification of mammograms with pure suspicious calcifications.
Menezes GL; Winter-Warnars GA; Koekenbier EL; Groen EJ; Verkooijen HM; Pijnappel RM
J Med Screen; 2018 Jun; 25(2):82-87. PubMed ID: 28691862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Growing BI-RADS category 3 lesions on follow-up breast ultrasound: malignancy rates and worrisome features.
Ha SM; Chae EY; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ; Kim HH
Br J Radiol; 2018 Jul; 91(1087):20170787. PubMed ID: 29658793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Follow-up interval for probably benign breast lesions on screening ultrasound in women at average risk for breast cancer with dense breasts.
Moon HJ; Kim MJ; Yoon JH; Kim EK
Acta Radiol; 2018 Sep; 59(9):1045-1050. PubMed ID: 29231050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Outcomes of Return to Routine Screening for BI-RADS 3 Lesions Detected at Supplemental Automated Whole-Breast Ultrasound in Women With Dense Breasts: A Prospective Study.
Barr RG; DeSivestri A; Golatta M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Dec; 217(6):1313-1321. PubMed ID: 34259039
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Dense Breast Ultrasound Screening After Digital Mammography Versus After Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Dibble EH; Singer TM; Jimoh N; Baird GL; Lourenco AP
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2019 Dec; 213(6):1397-1402. PubMed ID: 31553658
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Predictive values of BI-RADS(®) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
Badan GM; Piato S; Roveda D; de Faria Castro Fleury E
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Oct; 85(10):1701-1707. PubMed ID: 27666605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
