482 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29594402)
21. Correlation between contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast computed tomography features and prognostic staging in breast cancer.
Ma WM; Li J; Chen SG; Cai PQ; Chen S; Chen JT; Zhou CY; He N; Wu Y
Br J Radiol; 2022 Apr; 95(1132):20210466. PubMed ID: 34930038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Clinical evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography and contrast enhanced tomosynthesis--Comparison to contrast-enhanced breast MRI.
Chou CP; Lewin JM; Chiang CL; Hung BH; Yang TL; Huang JS; Liao JB; Pan HB
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Dec; 84(12):2501-8. PubMed ID: 26456307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Head-to-head comparison of cone-beam breast computed tomography and mammography in the diagnosis of primary breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Yang L; Zhou Z; Wang J; Lin Q; Dong Y; Guo Z; Shi F
Eur J Radiol; 2024 Feb; 171():111292. PubMed ID: 38211395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Low-Dose, Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Compared to Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI: A Feasibility Study.
Clauser P; Baltzer PAT; Kapetas P; Hoernig M; Weber M; Leone F; Bernathova M; Helbich TH
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2020 Aug; 52(2):589-595. PubMed ID: 32061002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The utility of breast cone-beam computed tomography, ultrasound, and digital mammography for detecting malignant breast tumors: A prospective study with 212 patients.
He N; Wu YP; Kong Y; Lv N; Huang ZM; Li S; Wang Y; Geng ZJ; Wu PH; Wei WD
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Feb; 85(2):392-403. PubMed ID: 26781145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Quantitative breast density measurement based on three-dimensional images: a study on cone-beam breast computed tomography.
Liu A; Yin L; Ma Y; Han P; Wu Y; Wu Y; Ye Z
Acta Radiol; 2022 Aug; 63(8):1023-1031. PubMed ID: 34259021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Dedicated Cone-beam Breast Computed Tomography and Diagnostic Mammography: Comparison of Radiation Dose, Patient Comfort, And Qualitative Review of Imaging Findings in BI-RADS 4 and 5 Lesions.
O'Connell AM; Kawakyu-O'Connor D
J Clin Imaging Sci; 2012; 2():7. PubMed ID: 22439131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Novel Breast Imaging and Machine Learning: Predicting Breast Lesion Malignancy at Cone-Beam CT Using Machine Learning Techniques.
Uhlig J; Uhlig A; Kunze M; Beissbarth T; Fischer U; Lotz J; Wienbeck S
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Aug; 211(2):W123-W131. PubMed ID: 29792725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Cone-beam CT for breast imaging: Radiation dose, breast coverage, and image quality.
O'Connell A; Conover DL; Zhang Y; Seifert P; Logan-Young W; Lin CF; Sahler L; Ning R
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Aug; 195(2):496-509. PubMed ID: 20651210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Contrast-enhanced Mammography versus Contrast-enhanced Breast MRI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Pötsch N; Vatteroni G; Clauser P; Helbich TH; Baltzer PAT
Radiology; 2022 Oct; 305(1):94-103. PubMed ID: 36154284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography in Comparison to Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Lesions.
Xing D; Lv Y; Sun B; Xie H; Dong J; Hao C; Chen Q; Chi X
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2019; 43(2):245-251. PubMed ID: 30531546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Potential of Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Characterization of Breast Lesions: Intraindividual Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Baltzer PAT; Bickel H; Spick C; Wengert G; Woitek R; Kapetas P; Clauser P; Helbich TH; Pinker K
Invest Radiol; 2018 Apr; 53(4):229-235. PubMed ID: 29190227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Diagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced breast MRI versus X-ray mammography in women with different degrees of breast density.
Barkhausen J; Bischof A; Haverstock D; Klemens M; Brueggenwerth G; Weber O; Endrikat J
Acta Radiol; 2021 May; 62(5):586-593. PubMed ID: 32678675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The role of breast tomosynthesis in a predominantly dense breast population at a tertiary breast centre: breast density assessment and diagnostic performance in comparison with MRI.
Förnvik D; Kataoka M; Iima M; Ohashi A; Kanao S; Toi M; Togashi K
Eur Radiol; 2018 Aug; 28(8):3194-3203. PubMed ID: 29460074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Accuracy of cone-beam breast computed tomography for assessing breast cancer tumor size-comparison with breast magnetic resonance imaging.
Zhao M; Song X; Ma Y; Li Z; Wang Y; Liu A; Lu H; Ma Y; Ye Z
Gland Surg; 2024 Mar; 13(3):281-296. PubMed ID: 38601282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Breast lesion size assessment in mastectomy specimens: Correlation of cone-beam breast-CT, digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography with histopathology.
Wienbeck S; Uhlig J; Fischer U; Hellriegel M; von Fintel E; Kulenkampff D; Surov A; Lotz J; Perske C
Medicine (Baltimore); 2019 Sep; 98(37):e17082. PubMed ID: 31517829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Imaging manifestations of idiopathic granulomatous lobular mastitis on cone-beam breast computed tomography.
Lin Q; Fei C; Wu X; Wu Q; Chen Q; Yan Y
Eur J Radiol; 2022 Sep; 154():110389. PubMed ID: 35772336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Reference Range of CT Value in NC-CBBCT Based on Female Breast Structure.
Wei W; Zhong W; Kang W; Zhao X; Yi X; Su D
Curr Med Imaging; 2023; 19(13):1523-1532. PubMed ID: 36734890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Evaluation of the applicability of BI-RADS® MRI for the interpretation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
Travieso-Aja MM; Maldonado-Saluzzi D; Naranjo-Santana P; Fernández-Ruiz C; Severino-Rondón W; Rodríguez Rodríguez M; Luzardo OP
Radiologia (Engl Ed); 2019; 61(6):477-488. PubMed ID: 31262509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
