158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30630562)
1. Diagnostic Accuracy of MR Mammography in Diagnosing Malignant Breast Lesions Taking Histopathology as Gold Standard.
Fatima S; Waheed S; Khan MI
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2019 Jan; 29(1):16-18. PubMed ID: 30630562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI breast for lesion detection and characterization with histopathological co relation: preliminary experience at tertiary care hospital.
Shafqat G; Agha A; Masror I; Rehan M; Afzal S
J Pak Med Assoc; 2011 Mar; 61(3):252-5. PubMed ID: 21465939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with BI-RADS 3-5 microcalcifications.
Cilotti A; Iacconi C; Marini C; Moretti M; Mazzotta D; Traino C; Naccarato AG; Piagneri V; Giaconi C; Bevilacqua G; Bartolozzi C
Radiol Med; 2007 Mar; 112(2):272-86. PubMed ID: 17361370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in screening detected microcalcification lesions of the breast: is there any value?
Uematsu T; Yuen S; Kasami M; Uchida Y
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Jul; 103(3):269-81. PubMed ID: 17063274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Do mammography, sonography, and MR mammography have a diagnostic benefit compared with mammography and sonography?
Müller-Schimpfle M; Stoll P; Stern W; Kurz S; Dammann F; Claussen CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 May; 168(5):1323-9. PubMed ID: 9129436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Is breast MRI a helpful additional diagnostic test in suspicious mammographic microcalcifications?
Baltzer PAT; Bennani-Baiti B; Stöttinger A; Bumberger A; Kapetas P; Clauser P
Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Feb; 46():70-74. PubMed ID: 29122667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Diagnosis of breast lump by fine needle aspiration cytology and mammography.
Rahman MZ; Sikder AM; Nabi SR
Mymensingh Med J; 2011 Oct; 20(4):658-64. PubMed ID: 22081186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions.
Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Padula S; Altomari F; Moriconi E; Pronio AM; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
Radiology; 2007 Jun; 243(3):670-80. PubMed ID: 17446524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Diagnostic Accuracy of Sonoelastography in the Non-Invasive Diagnosis of Malignant Breast Cancer Compared to Histopathology as a Gold Standard.
Rehman H; Raza S; Aziz S; Ahmad AM; Tahir S
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2017 May; 27(5):267-270. PubMed ID: 28599685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Role of Magnetic Resonance Mammography in the Evaluation of Indeterminate Breast Lesions.
Mishra E; Kaur N; Kaur R; Dalal U; Handa U; Anand GS
J Assoc Physicians India; 2023 Nov; 71(11):76-84. PubMed ID: 38720501
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Diagnostic accuracy of Tc-99m-MIBI for breast carcinoma in correlation with mammography and sonography.
Habib S; Maseeh-uz-Zaman ; Hameed A; Niaz K; Hashmi H; Kamal S
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2009 Oct; 19(10):622-6. PubMed ID: 19811712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Characterization of breast lesions with CE-MR multimodal morphological and kinetic analysis: comparison with conventional mammography and high-resolution ultrasound.
Vassiou K; Kanavou T; Vlychou M; Poultsidi A; Athanasiou E; Arvanitis DL; Fezoulidis IV
Eur J Radiol; 2009 Apr; 70(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 18295425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Dynamic contrast-enhanced mammography and breast MRI in the diagnosis of breast cancer and detection of tumor size.
Tekinhatun M; Sabir N; Erdem E; Yilmaz S; Ufuk F
Turk J Med Sci; 2024; 54(1):249-261. PubMed ID: 38812642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Diagnostic accuracy of high-resolution MRI using a microscopy coil for patients with presumed DCIS following mammography screening.
Zhu J; Kurihara Y; Kanemaki Y; Ogata H; Fukuda M; Nakajima Y; Maeda I
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2007 Jan; 25(1):96-103. PubMed ID: 17154376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Sensitivity and specificity of unilateral edema on T2w-TSE sequences in MR-Mammography considering 974 histologically verified lesions.
Baltzer PA; Yang F; Dietzel M; Herzog A; Simon A; Vag T; Gajda M; Camara O; Kaiser WA
Breast J; 2010; 16(3):233-9. PubMed ID: 20565468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The necrosis sign in magnetic resonance-mammography: diagnostic accuracy in 1,084 histologically verified breast lesions.
Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Vag T; Herzog A; Gajda M; Camara O; Kaiser WA
Breast J; 2010; 16(6):603-8. PubMed ID: 21070437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Detection of breast cancer with conventional mammography and contrast-enhanced MR imaging.
Kacl GM; Liu P; Debatin JF; Garzoli E; Caduff RF; Krestin GP
Eur Radiol; 1998; 8(2):194-200. PubMed ID: 9477265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Clinical value of suspicious calcification in the diagnosis and surgical treatment of breast lesions using contrast-enhanced spectral mammography].
Sun XF; Xing W; Yu SN; Sha YY; Pan L; Chen Q
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Jan; 100(1):42-46. PubMed ID: 31914557
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Benign versus malignant breast disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced MR imaging and Tc-99m tetrofosmin scintimammography.
Fenlon HM; Phelan NC; O'Sullivan P; Tierney S; Gorey T; Ennis JT
Radiology; 1997 Oct; 205(1):214-20. PubMed ID: 9314988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
