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 *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30766895)

  • 1. Comparison of contrast-enhanced digital mammography and contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis for lesion assessment.
    Huang H; Scaduto DA; Liu C; Yang J; Zhu C; Rinaldi K; Eisenberg J; Liu J; Hoernig M; Wicklein J; Vogt S; Mertelmeier T; Fisher PR; Zhao W
    J Med Imaging (Bellingham); 2019 Jul; 6(3):031407. PubMed ID: 30766895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Digital breast tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography alone and in combination compared to 2D digital synthetized mammography and MR imaging in breast cancer detection and classification.
    Petrillo A; Fusco R; Vallone P; Filice S; Granata V; Petrosino T; Rosaria Rubulotta M; Setola SV; Mattace Raso M; Maio F; Raiano C; Siani C; Di Bonito M; Botti G
    Breast J; 2020 May; 26(5):860-872. PubMed ID: 31886607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM) Helps to Safely Reduce Benign Breast Biopsies for Low to Moderately Suspicious Soft Tissue Lesions.
    Zuley ML; Bandos AI; Abrams GS; Ganott MA; Gizienski TA; Hakim CM; Kelly AE; Nair BE; Sumkin JH; Waheed U; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 2020 Jul; 27(7):969-976. PubMed ID: 31495761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in breast cancer detection in comparison to tomosynthesis, synthetic 2D mammography and tomosynthesis combined with ultrasound in women with dense breast.
    Sudhir R; Sannapareddy K; Potlapalli A; Krishnamurthy PB; Buddha S; Koppula V
    Br J Radiol; 2021 Feb; 94(1118):20201046. PubMed ID: 33242249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Single Center Evaluation of Comparative Breast Radiation dose of Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM), Digital Mammography (DM) and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT).
    Bicchierai G; Busoni S; Tortoli P; Bettarini S; Naro FD; De Benedetto D; Savi E; Bellini C; Miele V; Nori J
    Acad Radiol; 2022 Sep; 29(9):1342-1349. PubMed ID: 35065889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Architecture distortion score (ADS) in malignancy risk stratification of architecture distortion on contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
    Goh Y; Chan CW; Pillay P; Lee HS; Pan HB; Hung BH; Quek ST; Chou CP
    Eur Radiol; 2021 May; 31(5):2657-2666. PubMed ID: 33125555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Which clinical, radiological, histological, and molecular parameters are associated with the absence of enhancement of known breast cancers with Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM)?
    Bicchierai G; Amato F; Vanzi B; De Benedetto D; Boeri C; Vanzi E; Di Naro F; Bianchi S; Cirone D; Cozzi D; Miele V; Nori J
    Breast; 2020 Dec; 54():15-24. PubMed ID: 32889303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM).
    Amato F; Bicchierai G; Cirone D; Depretto C; Di Naro F; Vanzi E; Scaperrotta G; Bartolotta TV; Miele V; Nori J
    Radiol Med; 2019 Dec; 124(12):1229-1237. PubMed ID: 31773458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) in the preoperative staging of breast cancer: Large-scale single-center experience.
    Bicchierai G; Tonelli P; Piacenti A; De Benedetto D; Boeri C; Vanzi E; Bianchi S; Cirone D; Kaur Gill M; Miele V; Nori J
    Breast J; 2020 Jul; 26(7):1276-1283. PubMed ID: 31999029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part I. Single-energy imaging.
    Hill ML; Mainprize JG; Carton AK; Muller S; Ebrahimi M; Jong RA; Dromain C; Yaffe MJ
    Med Phys; 2013 May; 40(5):051910. PubMed ID: 23635280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Anatomical noise in contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Part II. Dual-energy imaging.
    Hill ML; Mainprize JG; Carton AK; Saab-Puong S; Iordache R; Muller S; Jong RA; Dromain C; Yaffe MJ
    Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081907. PubMed ID: 23927321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of False-Positive Versus True-Positive Findings on Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography.
    Amir T; Hogan MP; Jacobs S; Sevilimedu V; Sung J; Jochelson MS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 May; 218(5):797-808. PubMed ID: 34817195
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Contrast enhanced dual energy spectral mammogram, an emerging addendum in breast imaging.
    Kariyappa KD; Gnanaprakasam F; Anand S; Krishnaswami M; Ramachandran M
    Br J Radiol; 2016 Nov; 89(1067):20150609. PubMed ID: 27610475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI.
    Yuen S; Monzawa S; Gose A; Yanai S; Yata Y; Matsumoto H; Ichinose Y; Tashiro T; Yamagami K
    Breast Cancer; 2022 Jul; 29(4):677-687. PubMed ID: 35220511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
    Dromain C; Balleyguier C; Adler G; Garbay JR; Delaloge S
    Eur J Radiol; 2009 Jan; 69(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 18790584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study.
    Dromain C; Thibault F; Diekmann F; Fallenberg EM; Jong RA; Koomen M; Hendrick RE; Tardivon A; Toledano A
    Breast Cancer Res; 2012 Jun; 14(3):R94. PubMed ID: 22697607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Chen SC; Carton AK; Albert M; Conant EF; Schnall MD; Maidment AD
    Acad Radiol; 2007 Feb; 14(2):229-38. PubMed ID: 17236995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
    Francescone MA; Jochelson MS; Dershaw DD; Sung JS; Hughes MC; Zheng J; Moskowitz C; Morris EA
    Eur J Radiol; 2014 Aug; 83(8):1350-5. PubMed ID: 24932846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.