These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

591 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30277445)

  • 21. Is There a Difference in the Diagnostic Outcomes of Calcifications Initially Identified on Synthetic Tomosynthesis Versus Full-Field Digital Mammography Screening?
    Zhu H; Polat D; Evans P; Mootz A; Blackburn T; Xi Y; Dogan BE
    Eur J Radiol; 2020 Dec; 133():109365. PubMed ID: 33142193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The TOMMY trial: a comparison of TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY in the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme--a multicentre retrospective reading study comparing the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography with digital mammography alone.
    Gilbert FJ; Tucker L; Gillan MG; Willsher P; Cooke J; Duncan KA; Michell MJ; Dobson HM; Lim YY; Purushothaman H; Strudley C; Astley SM; Morrish O; Young KC; Duffy SW
    Health Technol Assess; 2015 Jan; 19(4):i-xxv, 1-136. PubMed ID: 25599513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Recall Rate Reduction with Tomosynthesis During Baseline Screening Examinations: An Assessment From a Prospective Trial.
    Sumkin JH; Ganott MA; Chough DM; Catullo VJ; Zuley ML; Shinde DD; Hakim CM; Bandos AI; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 2015 Dec; 22(12):1477-82. PubMed ID: 26391857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Multicenter Evaluation of Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Combination with Synthetic versus Digital Mammography.
    Zuckerman SP; Sprague BL; Weaver DL; Herschorn SD; Conant EF
    Radiology; 2020 Dec; 297(3):545-553. PubMed ID: 33048032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A reader study comparing prospective tomosynthesis interpretations with retrospective readings of the corresponding FFDM examinations.
    Rose SL; Tidwell AL; Ice MF; Nordmann AS; Sexton R; Song R
    Acad Radiol; 2014 Sep; 21(9):1204-10. PubMed ID: 25107868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [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]  

  • 27. Visualization of Breast Microcalcifications on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and 2-Dimensional Digital Mammography Using Specimens.
    Byun J; Lee JE; Cha ES; Chung J; Kim JH
    Breast Cancer (Auckl); 2017; 11():1178223417703388. PubMed ID: 28469438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Clinical Performance of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography Combined with Tomosynthesis in a Large Screening Population.
    Aujero MP; Gavenonis SC; Benjamin R; Zhang Z; Holt JS
    Radiology; 2017 Apr; 283(1):70-76. PubMed ID: 28221096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The Potential Impact of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis on the Benign Biopsy Rate in Women Recalled within the UK Breast Screening Programme.
    Sharma N; McMahon M; Haigh I; Chen Y; Dall BJG
    Radiology; 2019 May; 291(2):310-317. PubMed ID: 30888932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparison of two-dimensional synthesized mammograms versus original digital mammograms alone and in combination with tomosynthesis images.
    Zuley ML; Guo B; Catullo VJ; Chough DM; Kelly AE; Lu AH; Rathfon GY; Lee Spangler M; Sumkin JH; Wallace LP; Bandos AI
    Radiology; 2014 Jun; 271(3):664-71. PubMed ID: 24475859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Diagnostic value of the stand-alone synthetic image in digital breast tomosynthesis examinations.
    Garayoa J; Chevalier M; Castillo M; Mahillo-Fernández I; Amallal El Ouahabi N; Estrada C; Tejerina A; Benitez O; Valverde J
    Eur Radiol; 2018 Feb; 28(2):565-572. PubMed ID: 28812190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Can digital breast tomosynthesis replace conventional diagnostic mammography views for screening recalls without calcifications? A comparison study in a simulated clinical setting.
    Brandt KR; Craig DA; Hoskins TL; Henrichsen TL; Bendel EC; Brandt SR; Mandrekar J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Feb; 200(2):291-8. PubMed ID: 23345348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Kim WH; Chang JM; Koo HR; Seo M; Bae MS; Lee J; Moon WK
    Acta Radiol; 2017 Feb; 58(2):148-155. PubMed ID: 27178032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Multiple Angulated Mammography Reconstructions in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for the Diagnosis of Microcalcifications - Added Value to Standard Stack Reconstructions and Synthesized Mammography.
    Neubauer J; Neubauer C; Wicklein J; Mertelmeier T; Windfuhr-Blum M; Langer M
    Rofo; 2018 May; 190(5):433-440. PubMed ID: 29390228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Digital breast tomosynthesis: sensitivity for cancer in younger symptomatic women.
    Whelehan P; Ali K; Vinnicombe S; Ball G; Cox J; Farry P; Jenkin M; Lowry K; McIntosh SA; Nutt R; Oeppen R; Reilly M; Stahnke M; Steel J; Sim YT; Warwick V; Wilkinson L; Zafeiris D; Evans AJ
    Br J Radiol; 2021 Mar; 94(1119):20201105. PubMed ID: 33411577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Characterisation of microcalcification clusters on 2D digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): does DBT underestimate microcalcification clusters? Results of a multicentre study.
    Tagliafico A; Mariscotti G; Durando M; Stevanin C; Tagliafico G; Martino L; Bignotti B; Calabrese M; Houssami N
    Eur Radiol; 2015 Jan; 25(1):9-14. PubMed ID: 25163902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Lesion conspicuity on synthetic screening mammography compared to full field digital screening mammography.
    Giess CS; Raza S; Denison CM; Yeh ED; Gombos EC; Frost EP; Bay CP; Chikarmane SA
    Clin Imaging; 2021 Jul; 75():90-96. PubMed ID: 33508756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison.
    Spangler ML; Zuley ML; Sumkin JH; Abrams G; Ganott MA; Hakim C; Perrin R; Chough DM; Shah R; Gur D
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Feb; 196(2):320-4. PubMed ID: 21257882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Double reading of automated breast ultrasound with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening.
    Lee JM; Partridge SC; Liao GJ; Hippe DS; Kim AE; Lee CI; Rahbar H; Scheel JR; Lehman CD
    Clin Imaging; 2019; 55():119-125. PubMed ID: 30807927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.