396 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30236642)
1. Digital breast tomosynthesis: Image acquisition principles and artifacts.
Sujlana PS; Mahesh M; Vedantham S; Harvey SC; Mullen LA; Woods RW
Clin Imaging; 2019; 55():188-195. PubMed ID: 30236642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Physics, Artifacts, and Quality Control Considerations.
Tirada N; Li G; Dreizin D; Robinson L; Khorjekar G; Dromi S; Ernst T
Radiographics; 2019; 39(2):413-426. PubMed ID: 30768362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Screening Mammography Findings From One Standard Projection Only in the Era of Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Cohen EO; Tso HH; Phalak KA; Mayo RC; Leung JWT
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Aug; 211(2):445-451. PubMed ID: 29792742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical implementation of synthesized mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis in a routine clinical practice.
Freer PE; Riegert J; Eisenmenger L; Ose D; Winkler N; Stein MA; Stoddard GJ; Hess R
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Nov; 166(2):501-509. PubMed ID: 28780702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Screening for dense breasts: digital breast tomosynthesis.
Destounis SV; Morgan R; Arieno A
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Feb; 204(2):261-4. PubMed ID: 25615747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Calcifications at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Imaging Features and Biopsy Techniques.
Horvat JV; Keating DM; Rodrigues-Duarte H; Morris EA; Mango VL
Radiographics; 2019; 39(2):307-318. PubMed ID: 30681901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Strengths and Weaknesses of Synthetic Mammography in Screening.
Ratanaprasatporn L; Chikarmane SA; Giess CS
Radiographics; 2017; 37(7):1913-1927. PubMed ID: 29131762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Synthetic Mammography: Benefits, Drawbacks, and Pitfalls.
Chikarmane SA; Offit LR; Giess CS
Radiographics; 2023 Oct; 43(10):e230018. PubMed ID: 37768863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images.
Skaane P; Bandos AI; Eben EB; Jebsen IN; Krager M; Haakenaasen U; Ekseth U; Izadi M; Hofvind S; Gullien R
Radiology; 2014 Jun; 271(3):655-63. PubMed ID: 24484063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison between two-dimensional synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of T1 breast cancer.
Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Ko ES; Hahn SY; Shin JH; Kim MJ
Eur Radiol; 2016 Aug; 26(8):2538-46. PubMed ID: 26628063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quantitative analysis of radiation dosage and image quality between digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with two-dimensional synthetic mammography and full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
Choi Y; Woo OH; Shin HS; Cho KR; Seo BK; Choi GY
Clin Imaging; 2019; 55():12-17. PubMed ID: 30703693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Synthesized Digital Mammography Imaging.
Freer PE; Winkler N
Radiol Clin North Am; 2017 May; 55(3):503-512. PubMed ID: 28411676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of the diagnostic performance of synthesized two-dimensional mammography and full-field digital mammography alone or in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis.
You C; Zhang Y; Gu Y; Xiao Q; Liu G; Shen X; Yang W; Peng W
Breast Cancer; 2020 Jan; 27(1):47-53. PubMed ID: 31302894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Review of radiation dose estimates in digital breast tomosynthesis relative to those in two-view full-field digital mammography.
Svahn TM; Houssami N; Sechopoulos I; Mattsson S
Breast; 2015 Apr; 24(2):93-9. PubMed ID: 25554018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Comparison of full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis on assessment of the lesions in dense breast: a preliminary study].
Li Y; Ye ZX; Wu T; An YH; Liu PF; Bao RX
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2013 Jan; 35(1):33-7. PubMed ID: 23648297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography with new reconstruction and new processing for dose reduction.
Endo T; Morita T; Oiwa M; Suda N; Sato Y; Ichihara S; Shiraiwa M; Yoshikawa K; Horiba T; Ogawa H; Hayashi Y; Sendai T; Arai T
Breast Cancer; 2018 Mar; 25(2):159-166. PubMed ID: 28956298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Strategies to Increase Cancer Detection: Review of True-Positive and False-Negative Results at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening.
Korhonen KE; Weinstein SP; McDonald ES; Conant EF
Radiographics; 2016; 36(7):1954-1965. PubMed ID: 27715711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): a review of the evidence for use as a screening tool.
Gilbert FJ; Tucker L; Young KC
Clin Radiol; 2016 Feb; 71(2):141-50. PubMed ID: 26707815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
