421 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29451022)
21. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): initial experience in a clinical setting.
Skaane P; Gullien R; Bjørndal H; Eben EB; Ekseth U; Haakenaasen U; Jahr G; Jebsen IN; Krager M
Acta Radiol; 2012 Jun; 53(5):524-9. PubMed ID: 22593120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography.
Chae EY; Kim HH; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ
Br J Radiol; 2016 Jun; 89(1062):20150743. PubMed ID: 27072391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Additional US or DBT after digital mammography: which one is the best combination?
Elizalde A; Pina L; Etxano J; Slon P; Zalazar R; Caballeros M
Acta Radiol; 2016 Jan; 57(1):13-8. PubMed ID: 25523063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Effect of Mammographic Screening Modality on Breast Density Assessment: Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Gastounioti A; McCarthy AM; Pantalone L; Synnestvedt M; Kontos D; Conant EF
Radiology; 2019 May; 291(2):320-327. PubMed ID: 30888933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Impact on the recall rate of digital breast tomosynthesis as an adjunct to digital mammography in the screening setting. A double reading experience and review of the literature.
Carbonaro LA; Di Leo G; Clauser P; Trimboli RM; Verardi N; Fedeli MP; Girometti R; Tafà A; Bruscoli P; Saguatti G; Bazzocchi M; Sardanelli F
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Apr; 85(4):808-14. PubMed ID: 26971428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis in combination with 2D mammography for the characterisation of mammographic abnormalities.
Sanmugasiva VV; Ramli Hamid MT; Fadzli F; Rozalli FI; Yeong CH; Ab Mumin N; Rahmat K
Sci Rep; 2020 Nov; 10(1):20628. PubMed ID: 33244075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Conspicuity of suspicious breast lesions on contrast enhanced breast CT compared to digital breast tomosynthesis and mammography.
Aminololama-Shakeri S; Abbey CK; López JE; Hernandez AM; Gazi P; Boone JM; Lindfors KK
Br J Radiol; 2019 May; 92(1097):20181034. PubMed ID: 30810339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Characterization of breast lesions: comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasonography.
Kim SA; Chang JM; Cho N; Yi A; Moon WK
Korean J Radiol; 2015; 16(2):229-38. PubMed ID: 25741187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The added value of digital breast tomosynthesis in improving diagnostic performance of BI-RADS categorization of mammographically indeterminate breast lesions.
Basha MAA; Safwat HK; Alaa Eldin AM; Dawoud HA; Hassanin AM
Insights Imaging; 2020 Feb; 11(1):26. PubMed ID: 32060736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Digital breast tomosynthesis in the diagnostic environment: A subjective side-by-side review.
Hakim CM; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Sumkin JH; Zuley ML; Gur D
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Aug; 195(2):W172-6. PubMed ID: 20651178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis.
Chen SC; Carton AK; Albert M; Conant EF; Schnall MD; Maidment AD
Acad Radiol; 2007 Feb; 14(2):229-38. PubMed ID: 17236995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Comparison of visibility of circumscribed masses on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and 2D mammography: are circumscribed masses better visualized and assured of being benign on DBT?
Nakashima K; Uematsu T; Itoh T; Takahashi K; Nishimura S; Hayashi T; Sugino T
Eur Radiol; 2017 Feb; 27(2):570-577. PubMed ID: 27236817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Value of contrast-enhanced mammography combined with the Kaiser score for clinical decision-making regarding tomosynthesis BI-RADS 4A lesions.
Rong X; Kang Y; Xue J; Han P; Li Z; Yang G; Shi G
Eur Radiol; 2022 Nov; 32(11):7439-7447. PubMed ID: 35639141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Significance and Application of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for the BI-RADS Classification of Breast Cancer.
Cai SQ; Yan JX; Chen QS; Huang ML; Cai DL
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2015; 16(9):4109-14. PubMed ID: 25987095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. The Impact of Adding Digital Breast Tomosynthesis to BI-RADS Categorization of Mammographically Equivocal Breast Lesions.
Hassan RM; Almalki YE; Basha MAA; Alduraibi SK; Aboualkheir M; Almushayti ZA; Aldhilan AS; Aly SA; Alshamy AA
Diagnostics (Basel); 2023 Apr; 13(8):. PubMed ID: 37189524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Synthetic 2-Dimensional Mammography Can Replace Digital Mammography as an Adjunct to Wide-Angle Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Clauser P; Baltzer PAT; Kapetas P; Woitek R; Weber M; Leone F; Bernathova M; Helbich TH
Invest Radiol; 2019 Feb; 54(2):83-88. PubMed ID: 30281557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Benefit of digital breast tomosynthesis in symptomatic young women (≤30 years) diagnosed with BI-RADS category 4 or 5 on ultrasound.
Huang JL; Lin Q
Clin Radiol; 2022 Jan; 77(1):e55-e63. PubMed ID: 34763818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. [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]
40. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus supplemental diagnostic mammographic views for evaluation of noncalcified breast lesions.
Zuley ML; Bandos AI; Ganott MA; Sumkin JH; Kelly AE; Catullo VJ; Rathfon GY; Lu AH; Gur D
Radiology; 2013 Jan; 266(1):89-95. PubMed ID: 23143023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
