80 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30912178)
21. Potential Usefulness a Coronal View using an Automated Breast Ultrasound System in Detecting Breast Lesions.
Suzuki M; Nakayama R; Namba K; Kawami H; Nara M; Nakamura S
Eur J Breast Health; 2024 Jan; 20(1):57-63. PubMed ID: 38187110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Spatial Coherence Approaches to Distinguish Suspicious Mass Contents in Fundamental and Harmonic Breast Ultrasound Images.
Sharma A; Oluyemi E; Myers K; Ambinder E; Bell MAL
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2024 Jan; 71(1):70-84. PubMed ID: 37956000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Prospective Comparison of Handheld Ultrasound Devices from Different Manufacturers with Respect to B-Scan Quality and Clinical Significance for Various Abdominal Sonography Questions.
Merkel D; Züllich TF; Schneider C; Yousefzada M; Beer D; Ludwig M; Weimer A; Künzel J; Kloeckner R; Weimer JM
Diagnostics (Basel); 2023 Dec; 13(24):. PubMed ID: 38132206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Diagnostic Performance of US and MRI in Predicting Malignancy of Soft Tissue Masses: Using a Scoring System.
Shu H; Ma Q; Li A; Wang P; Gao Y; Yao Q; Hu Y; Ye X
Front Oncol; 2022; 12():853232. PubMed ID: 35574339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Inter-System Variability of Eight Different Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) Devices-A Prospective Comparison of B-Scan Quality and Clinical Significance in Intensive Care.
Weimer JM; Beer D; Schneider C; Yousefzada M; Gottwald M; Züllich TF; Weimer A; Jonck C; Buggenhagen H; Kloeckner R; Merkel D
Diagnostics (Basel); 2023 Dec; 14(1):. PubMed ID: 38201363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Maximum intensity projection based on high frame rate contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the differentiation of breast tumors.
Li J; Wei C; Ma X; Ying T; Sun D; Zheng Y
Front Oncol; 2023; 13():1274716. PubMed ID: 37965464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Predictive Value of Lump Aspect Ratio, Boundary Clarity, and Spiculation/Angularity in Distinguishing Benign and Malignant Breast Lumps.
Gao X; Zheng Z; Tian F; Cheng W
Altern Ther Health Med; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38743902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Ultrasound characterization of breast masses.
Gokhale S
Indian J Radiol Imaging; 2009; 19(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 19881096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Patient perception of meander-like versus radial breast ultrasound.
Brasier-Lutz P; Jäggi-Wickes C; Schädelin S; Burian R; Schoenenberger CA; Zanetti-Dällenbach R
Ultrasound Int Open; 2024; 10():a22829193. PubMed ID: 38737925
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Correspondence to: "diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound in pelvic masses with bowel involvement".
Xi Y; Jiang H
Int J Surg; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38729107
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Diagnostic imaging of ovarian masses and not only - beyond ultrasound.
Bekiesinska-Figatowska M
Ginekol Pol; 2023 Nov; ():. PubMed ID: 37994811
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Automated breast ultrasound: are we ready to put it into practice in Brazil?
Urban L
Radiol Bras; 2020; 53(5):VII-VIII. PubMed ID: 33071383
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Automated Breast Ultrasound Screening for Dense Breasts.
Kim SH; Kim HH; Moon WK
Korean J Radiol; 2020 Jan; 21(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 31920025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Diagnostic performance of automated breast ultrasound and handheld ultrasound in women with dense breasts.
Jia M; Lin X; Zhou X; Yan H; Chen Y; Liu P; Bao L; Li A; Basu P; Qiao Y; Sankaranarayanan R
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2020 Jun; 181(3):589-597. PubMed ID: 32338323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Three-dimensional automated breast ultrasound: Technical aspects and first results.
Vourtsis A
Diagn Interv Imaging; 2019 Oct; 100(10):579-592. PubMed ID: 30962169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. The diagnostic performance of automated versus handheld breast ultrasound and mammography in symptomatic outpatient women: a multicenter, cross-sectional study in China.
Lin X; Jia M; Zhou X; Bao L; Chen Y; Liu P; Feng R; Zhang X; Zhu L; Wang H; Zhu Y; Tang G; Feng W; Li A; Qiao Y
Eur Radiol; 2021 Feb; 31(2):947-957. PubMed ID: 32852589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Detection and diagnosis of automated breast ultrasound in patients with BI-RADS category 4 microcalcifications: a retrospective study.
Yu LF; Dai CC; Zhu LX; Xu XJ; Yan HJ; Jiang CX; Bao LY
BMC Med Imaging; 2024 May; 24(1):126. PubMed ID: 38807064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. The cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening in the UK.
Hill H; Kearns B; Pashayan N; Roadevin C; Sasieni P; Offman J; Duffy S
Br J Cancer; 2023 Nov; 129(11):1801-1809. PubMed ID: 37848734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Screening in Resource-Limited Settings: Current Practice and Future Directions.
Dan Q; Zheng T; Liu L; Sun D; Chen Y
Cancers (Basel); 2023 Mar; 15(7):. PubMed ID: 37046773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Diagnostic Performance of Prototype Handheld Ultrasound According to the Fifth Edition of BI-RADS for Breast Ultrasound Compared with Automated Breast Ultrasound among Females with Positive Lumps.
Ibraheem SA; Mahmud R; Mohamad Saini S; Abu Hassan H; Keiteb AS
Diagnostics (Basel); 2023 Mar; 13(6):. PubMed ID: 36980373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
