408 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29845403)
21. Screening Algorithms in Dense Breasts:
Berg WA; Rafferty EA; Friedewald SM; Hruska CB; Rahbar H
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Feb; 216(2):275-294. PubMed ID: 32903054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening: The Reggio Emilia Tomosynthesis Randomized Trial.
Pattacini P; Nitrosi A; Giorgi Rossi P; Iotti V; Ginocchi V; Ravaioli S; Vacondio R; Braglia L; Cavuto S; Campari C;
Radiology; 2018 Aug; 288(2):375-385. PubMed ID: 29869961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Overview of Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis.
Lebron-Zapata L; Jochelson MS
PET Clin; 2018 Jul; 13(3):301-323. PubMed ID: 30100072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Molecular Breast Imaging in Breast Cancer Screening and Problem Solving.
Shermis RB; Redfern RE; Burns J; Kudrolli H
Radiographics; 2017; 37(5):1309-1606. PubMed ID: 28898193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Increased Cancer Detection Rate and Variations in the Recall Rate Resulting from Implementation of 3D Digital Breast Tomosynthesis into a Population-based Screening Program.
Sharpe RE; Venkataraman S; Phillips J; Dialani V; Fein-Zachary VJ; Prakash S; Slanetz PJ; Mehta TS
Radiology; 2016 Mar; 278(3):698-706. PubMed ID: 26458206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Digital breast tomosynthesis (3D mammography) for breast cancer screening and for assessment of screen-recalled findings: review of the evidence.
Li T; Marinovich ML; Houssami N
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther; 2018 Aug; 18(8):785-791. PubMed ID: 29847744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Additional Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Detected Suspicious Lesions in Known Patients With Breast Cancer: Comparison of Second-Look Digital Tomosynthesis and Ultrasonography.
Koh J; Kim EK; Kim MJ; Yoon JH; Moon HJ
Ultrasound Q; 2017 Jun; 33(2):167-173. PubMed ID: 28221238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of Call-Back Rates between Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Scott AM; Lashley MG; Drury NB; Dale PS
Am Surg; 2019 Aug; 85(8):855-857. PubMed ID: 32051067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Supplemental Screening for Patients at Intermediate and High Risk for Breast Cancer.
Wang L; Strigel RM
Radiol Clin North Am; 2021 Jan; 59(1):67-83. PubMed ID: 33223001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Diagnostic imaging of breast cancer : An update].
Funke M
Radiologe; 2016 Oct; 56(10):921-938. PubMed ID: 27600118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. 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]
33. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: comparison of the accuracy of lesion measurement and characterization using specimens.
Seo N; Kim HH; Shin HJ; Cha JH; Kim H; Moon JH; Gong G; Ahn SH; Son BH
Acta Radiol; 2014 Jul; 55(6):661-7. PubMed ID: 24005560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Assessment of disease extent on contrast-enhanced MRI in breast cancer detected at digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography alone.
Chudgar AV; Conant EF; Weinstein SP; Keller BM; Synnestvedt M; Yamartino P; McDonald ES
Clin Radiol; 2017 Jul; 72(7):573-579. PubMed ID: 28318506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Synthesized Two-Dimensional Images versus Full-Field Digital Mammography for Population Screening: Outcomes from the Verona Screening Program.
Caumo F; Zorzi M; Brunelli S; Romanucci G; Rella R; Cugola L; Bricolo P; Fedato C; Montemezzi S; Houssami N
Radiology; 2018 Apr; 287(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 29237146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Tailored breast cancer screening program with microdose mammography, US, and MR Imaging: short-term results of a pilot study in 40-49-year-old women.
Venturini E; Losio C; Panizza P; Rodighiero MG; Fedele I; Tacchini S; Schiani E; Ravelli S; Cristel G; Panzeri MM; De Cobelli F; Del Maschio A
Radiology; 2013 Aug; 268(2):347-55. PubMed ID: 23579052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Utility of Breast MRI for Further Evaluation of Equivocal Findings on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Niell BL; Bhatt K; Dang P; Humphrey K
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Nov; 211(5):1171-1178. PubMed ID: 30207789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. Breast Density Legislation and Clinical Evidence.
Hooley RJ
Radiol Clin North Am; 2017 May; 55(3):513-526. PubMed ID: 28411677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Comparison of full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in ultrasonography-detected breast cancers.
Nam KJ; Han BK; Ko ES; Choi JS; Ko EY; Jeong DW; Choo KS
Breast; 2015 Oct; 24(5):649-55. PubMed ID: 26292782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
