275 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31039027)
1. Utility and Outcomes of Imaging Evaluation for Palpable Lumps in the Postmastectomy Patient.
Dashevsky BZ; Hayward JH; Woodard GA; Joe BN; Lee AY
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2019 Aug; 213(2):464-472. PubMed ID: 31039027
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Utility of Diagnostic Mammography as the Primary Imaging Modality for Palpable Lumps in Women With Almost Entirely Fatty Breasts.
Linden OE; Hayward JH; Price ER; Kelil T; Joe BN; Lee AY
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Apr; 214(4):938-944. PubMed ID: 32023120
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical Value of Mammography in the Evaluation of Palpable Breast Lumps in Women 30 Years Old and Older.
Brown AL; Phillips J; Slanetz PJ; Fein-Zachary V; Venkataraman S; Dialani V; Mehta TS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Oct; 209(4):935-942. PubMed ID: 28777649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. New Palpable Breast Lump With Recent Negative Mammogram: Is Repeat Mammography Necessary?
Leung SE; Ben-Nachum I; Kornecki A
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Jul; 207(1):200-4. PubMed ID: 27081707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of abnormal mammography results and palpable breast abnormalities.
Kerlikowske K; Smith-Bindman R; Ljung BM; Grady D
Ann Intern Med; 2003 Aug; 139(4):274-84. PubMed ID: 12965983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Stereotactic and sonographic large-core biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: results of the Radiologic Diagnostic Oncology Group V study.
Fajardo LL; Pisano ED; Caudry DJ; Gatsonis CA; Berg WA; Connolly J; Schnitt S; Page DL; McNeil BJ;
Acad Radiol; 2004 Mar; 11(3):293-308. PubMed ID: 15035520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Surgical management of non-palpable breast tumors].
Farsang Z; Nagygyörgy A; Horváth L; Baranyák Z; Forrai G; Riedl E; Cserepes E; Benedek A; Bakity B
Magy Seb; 2014 Jun; 67(3):89-93. PubMed ID: 24873763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Palpable Lumps after Mastectomy: Radiologic-Pathologic Review of Benign and Malignant Masses.
Al-Khalili R; Alzeer A; Nguyen GK; Crane EP; Song JH; Jeon JL; Nellamattathil M; Makariou EV; Mango VL
Radiographics; 2021; 41(4):967-989. PubMed ID: 33989071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Normal mammography and ultrasonography in the setting of palpable breast cancer.
Beyer T; Moonka R
Am J Surg; 2003 May; 185(5):416-9. PubMed ID: 12727559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prospective evaluation of the value of combined mammographic and sonographic assessment in patients with palpable abnormalities of the breast.
Shetty MK; Shah YP; Sharman RS
J Ultrasound Med; 2003 Mar; 22(3):263-8; quiz 269-70. PubMed ID: 12636326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with palpable breast abnormalities and negative mammographic and sonographic findings.
Yalniz C; Campbell D; Le-Petross C; Shin K; Bevers TB; Hess KR; Whitman GJ
Breast J; 2020 Jul; 26(7):1289-1295. PubMed ID: 32108973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Imaging of Intracystic Papillary Carcinoma.
Speer ME; Adrada BE; Arribas EM; Hess KR; Middleton LP; Whitman GJ
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol; 2019; 48(4):348-352. PubMed ID: 30072190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses.
Chan CH; Coopey SB; Freer PE; Hughes KS
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Oct; 153(3):699-702. PubMed ID: 26341750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. US as the Primary Imaging Modality in the Evaluation of Palpable Breast Masses in Breastfeeding Women, Including Those of Advanced Maternal Age.
Chung M; Hayward JH; Woodard GA; Knobel A; Greenwood HI; Ray KM; Joe BN; Lee AY
Radiology; 2020 Nov; 297(2):316-324. PubMed ID: 32870133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Image guided versus palpation guided core needle biopsy of palpable breast masses: a prospective study.
Hari S; Kumari S; Srivastava A; Thulkar S; Mathur S; Veedu PT
Indian J Med Res; 2016 May; 143(5):597-604. PubMed ID: 27488003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinically palpable breast abnormalities with normal imaging: is clinically guided biopsy still required?
Gumus H; Gumus M; Mills P; Fish D; Devalia H; Jones SE; Jones PA; Sever AR
Clin Radiol; 2012 May; 67(5):437-40. PubMed ID: 22119297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Analysis of the results of 137 subclinical breast lesions excisions. Value of ultrasonography in the early diagnosis of breast cancer].
Jacob D; Brombart JC; Muller C; Lefèbvre C; Massa F; Depoerck A
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 1997; 26(1):27-31. PubMed ID: 9091540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Tl-201 scintigraphy, mammography and ultrasonography in the evaluation of palpable and nonpalpable breast lesions: a correlative study.
Ozdemir A; Oznur II; Vural G; Atasever T; Karabacak NI; Gökçora N; Işik S; Unlü M
Eur J Radiol; 1997 Feb; 24(2):145-54. PubMed ID: 9097057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Management of palpable but radiologically occult breast abnormalities.
Sundara Rajan S; White J; Peckham-Cooper A; Lane S; Lansdown M
Acta Cytol; 2012; 56(3):266-70. PubMed ID: 22555528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Ultrasound detection of nonpalpable mammographically occult malignancy.
Simpson WL; Hermann G; Rausch DR; Sherman J; Feig SA; Bleiweiss IJ; Jaffer S; Port A
Can Assoc Radiol J; 2008 Apr; 59(2):70-6. PubMed ID: 18533395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
