224 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30843008)
1. Comparison of ultrasound and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in determining benign and malignant breast lesions using pathology as a gold standard, in 102 Chinese women.
Yang L; Zhou C
Hell J Nucl Med; 2019; 22(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 30843008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Initial results of the FUSION-X-US prototype combining 3D automated breast ultrasound and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Schaefgen B; Heil J; Barr RG; Radicke M; Harcos A; Gomez C; Stieber A; Hennigs A; von Au A; Spratte J; Rauch G; Rom J; Schütz F; Sohn C; Golatta M
Eur Radiol; 2018 Jun; 28(6):2499-2506. PubMed ID: 29302784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. The simulation of 3D microcalcification clusters in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
Shaheen E; Van Ongeval C; Zanca F; Cockmartin L; Marshall N; Jacobs J; Young KC; R Dance D; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6659-71. PubMed ID: 22149848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of visibility of circumscribed masses on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and 2D mammography: are circumscribed masses better visualized and assured of being benign on DBT?
Nakashima K; Uematsu T; Itoh T; Takahashi K; Nishimura S; Hayashi T; Sugino T
Eur Radiol; 2017 Feb; 27(2):570-577. PubMed ID: 27236817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in the Evaluation of Palpable Breast Abnormalities.
Hawley JR; Kang-Chapman JK; Bonnet SE; Kerger AL; Taylor CR; Erdal BS
Acad Radiol; 2018 Mar; 25(3):297-304. PubMed ID: 29174225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Sensitivity of imaging for multifocal-multicentric breast carcinoma.
Bozzini A; Renne G; Meneghetti L; Bandi G; Santos G; Vento AR; Menna S; Andrighetto S; Viale G; Cassano E; Bellomi M
BMC Cancer; 2008 Sep; 8():275. PubMed ID: 18826585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Breast tomosynthesis: Accuracy of tumor measurement compared with digital mammography and ultrasonography.
Förnvik D; Zackrisson S; Ljungberg O; Svahn T; Timberg P; Tingberg A; Andersson I
Acta Radiol; 2010 Apr; 51(3):240-7. PubMed ID: 20105090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Non-calcified ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: comparison of diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis, digital mammography, and ultrasonography.
Su X; Lin Q; Cui C; Xu W; Wei Z; Fei J; Li L
Breast Cancer; 2017 Jul; 24(4):562-570. PubMed ID: 27837442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Early clinical experience with digital breast tomosynthesis for screening mammography.
Durand MA; Haas BM; Yao X; Geisel JL; Raghu M; Hooley RJ; Horvath LJ; Philpotts LE
Radiology; 2015 Jan; 274(1):85-92. PubMed ID: 25188431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Detection of microcalcifications in women with dense breasts and hypoechoic focal lesions: comparison of mammography and ultrasound.
Grigoryev M; Thomas A; Plath L; Durmus T; Slowinski T; Diekmann F; Fischer T
Ultraschall Med; 2014 Dec; 35(6):554-60. PubMed ID: 24871694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice.
Greenberg JS; Javitt MC; Katzen J; Michael S; Holland AE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Sep; 203(3):687-93. PubMed ID: 24918774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Breast screening using 2D-mammography or integrating digital breast tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) for single-reading or double-reading--evidence to guide future screening strategies.
Houssami N; Macaskill P; Bernardi D; Caumo F; Pellegrini M; Brunelli S; Tuttobene P; Bricolo P; Fantò C; Valentini M; Ciatto S
Eur J Cancer; 2014 Jul; 50(10):1799-1807. PubMed ID: 24746887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Characteristics of Invasive Breast Cancer Detected by Digital Breast Tomosynthesis on Screening and Diagnostic Mammograms.
Baydoun SE; Yang L; Xiong J; Fajardo LL
Can Assoc Radiol J; 2021 May; 72(2):242-250. PubMed ID: 32062995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of 3D and 2D shear-wave elastography for differentiating benign and malignant breast masses: focus on the diagnostic performance.
Choi HY; Sohn YM; Seo M
Clin Radiol; 2017 Oct; 72(10):878-886. PubMed ID: 28526455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Overview of digital breast tomosynthesis: Clinical cases, benefits and disadvantages.
Nguyen T; Levy G; Poncelet E; Le Thanh T; Prolongeau JF; Phalippou J; Massoni F; Laurent N
Diagn Interv Imaging; 2015 Sep; 96(9):843-59. PubMed ID: 26275829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Digital breast tomosynthesis within a symptomatic "one-stop breast clinic" for characterization of subtle findings.
Bansal GJ; Young P
Br J Radiol; 2015 Sep; 88(1053):20140855. PubMed ID: 26133221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Incremental effect from integrating 3D-mammography (tomosynthesis) with 2D-mammography: Increased breast cancer detection evident for screening centres in a population-based trial.
Caumo F; Bernardi D; Ciatto S; Macaskill P; Pellegrini M; Brunelli S; Tuttobene P; Bricolo P; Fantò C; Valentini M; Montemezzi S; Houssami N
Breast; 2014 Feb; 23(1):76-80. PubMed ID: 24316152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Adding 3D automated breast ultrasound to mammography screening in women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts: Report from a hospital-based, high-volume, single-center breast cancer screening program.
Wilczek B; Wilczek HE; Rasouliyan L; Leifland K
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Sep; 85(9):1554-63. PubMed ID: 27501888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
