426 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29723846)
1. Diagnostic Value of Nineteen Different Imaging Methods for Patients with Breast Cancer: a Network Meta-Analysis.
Zhang XH; Xiao C
Cell Physiol Biochem; 2018; 46(5):2041-2055. PubMed ID: 29723846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Network Meta-analysis for the Diagnostic Approach to Pathologic Nipple Discharge.
Filipe MD; Patuleia SIS; de Jong VMT; Vriens MR; van Diest PJ; Witkamp AJ
Clin Breast Cancer; 2020 Dec; 20(6):e723-e748. PubMed ID: 32665191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Scintimammography with technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile: comparison with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging.
Palmedo H; Grünwald F; Bender H; Schomburg A; Mallmann P; Krebs D; Biersack HJ
Eur J Nucl Med; 1996 Aug; 23(8):940-6. PubMed ID: 8753683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. FDG-PET/CT and MRI for Evaluation of Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.
Sheikhbahaei S; Trahan TJ; Xiao J; Taghipour M; Mena E; Connolly RM; Subramaniam RM
Oncologist; 2016 Aug; 21(8):931-9. PubMed ID: 27401897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Different Imaging Modalities for the Diagnosis of Axillary Lymph Node Metastases in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy.
Li Z; Gao Y; Gong H; Feng W; Ma Q; Li J; Lu X; Wang X; Lei J
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2023 May; 57(5):1392-1403. PubMed ID: 36054564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Diagnostic Values of 8 Different Imaging Modalities for Preoperative Detection of Axillary Lymph Node Metastasis of Breast Cancer: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.
Kim K; Shim SR; Kim SJ
Am J Clin Oncol; 2021 Jul; 44(7):331-339. PubMed ID: 33979099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT compared with that of contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast at 3 T.
Magometschnigg HF; Baltzer PA; Fueger B; Helbich TH; Karanikas G; Dubsky P; Rudas M; Weber M; Pinker K
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2015 Oct; 42(11):1656-1665. PubMed ID: 26121928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical roles of breast 3T MRI, FDG PET/CT, and breast ultrasound for asymptomatic women with an abnormal screening mammogram.
Chou CP; Peng NJ; Chang TH; Yang TL; Hu C; Lin HS; Huang JS; Pan HB
J Chin Med Assoc; 2015 Dec; 78(12):719-25. PubMed ID: 26364959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Tumor Staging in Patients With Primary Breast Cancer: A Comparison With Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Grueneisen J; Nagarajah J; Buchbender C; Hoffmann O; Schaarschmidt BM; Poeppel T; Forsting M; Quick HH; Umutlu L; Kinner S
Invest Radiol; 2015 Aug; 50(8):505-13. PubMed ID: 26115367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Diagnostic Performance of Adjunctive Imaging Modalities Compared to Mammography Alone in Women with Non-Dense and Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Hadadi I; Rae W; Clarke J; McEntee M; Ekpo E
Clin Breast Cancer; 2021 Aug; 21(4):278-291. PubMed ID: 33846098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Detection of Pathologic Complete Remission in Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Meta-analysis.
Gu YL; Pan SM; Ren J; Yang ZX; Jiang GQ
Clin Breast Cancer; 2017 Jul; 17(4):245-255. PubMed ID: 28209330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Retrospective and comparative analysis of (99m)Tc-Sestamibi breast specific gamma imaging versus mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of breast cancer in Chinese women.
Yu X; Hu G; Zhang Z; Qiu F; Shao X; Wang X; Zhan H; Chen Y; Deng Y; Huang J
BMC Cancer; 2016 Jul; 16():450. PubMed ID: 27401536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Breast cancer staging in a single session: whole-body PET/CT mammography.
Heusner TA; Kuemmel S; Umutlu L; Koeninger A; Freudenberg LS; Hauth EA; Kimmig KR; Forsting M; Bockisch A; Antoch G
J Nucl Med; 2008 Aug; 49(8):1215-22. PubMed ID: 18632831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Staging/restaging performance of F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: A review and meta-analysis.
Lin CY; Lin CL; Kao CH
Eur J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 107():158-165. PubMed ID: 30292261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Systematic review with network meta-analysis: Diagnostic values of ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with ischemic stroke.
Zhang XH; Liang HM
Medicine (Baltimore); 2019 Jul; 98(30):e16360. PubMed ID: 31348236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Complementary role of adjunctive breast magnetic resonance imaging and scintimammography in patients of all ages undergoing breast cancer surgery.
Howarth D; Slater S; Lau P; Booker J; Clark D; Sillar R
Australas Radiol; 2005 Aug; 49(4):289-97. PubMed ID: 16026435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Which combination of different ultrasonography modalities is more appropriate to diagnose breast cancer?: A network meta-analysis (a PRISMA-compliant article).
Zhou Y; Wu J
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Aug; 101(31):e29955. PubMed ID: 35945707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, automated breast ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Park J; Chae EY; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ; Choi YW; Kim HH
Eur J Radiol; 2018 Nov; 108():261-268. PubMed ID: 30396666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Digital breast tomosynthesis plus mammography, magnetic resonance imaging plus mammography and mammography alone: A comparison of diagnostic performance in symptomatic women.
Tang W; Hu FX; Zhu H; Wang QF; Gu YJ; Peng WJ
Clin Hemorheol Microcirc; 2017; 66(2):105-116. PubMed ID: 28211806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
