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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31296929)

  • 1. Needle-based storage-phosphor detector radiography is superior to a conventional powder-based storage phosphor detector and a high-resolution screen-film system in small patients (budgerigars and mice).
    Tebrün W; Ludewig E; Köhler C; Böhme J; Pees M
    Sci Rep; 2019 Jul; 9(1):10057. PubMed ID: 31296929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Physical evaluation of a needle photostimulable phosphor based CR mammography system.
    Marshall NW; Lemmens K; Bosmans H
    Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):811-24. PubMed ID: 22320791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Performance of a flat-panel detector in the detection of artificial erosive changes: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography.
    Ludwig K; Henschel A; Bernhardt TM; Lenzen H; Wormanns D; Diederich S; Heindel W
    Eur Radiol; 2003 Jun; 13(6):1316-23. PubMed ID: 12764648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Performance of a flat-panel detector in detecting artificial bone lesions: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography.
    Ludwig K; Lenzen H; Kamm KF; Link TM; Diederich S; Wormanns D; Heindel W
    Radiology; 2002 Feb; 222(2):453-9. PubMed ID: 11818613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Storage phosphor and film-screen mammography: performance with different mammographic techniques.
    Kheddache S; Thilander-Klang A; Lanhede B; Månsson LG; Bjurstam N; Ackerholm P; Björneld L
    Eur Radiol; 1999; 9(4):591-7. PubMed ID: 10354868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Lumbar spine radiography: digital flat-panel detector versus screen-film and storage-phosphor systems in monkeys as a pediatric model.
    Ludwig K; Ahlers K; Wormanns D; Freund M; Bernhardt TM; Diederich S; Heindel W
    Radiology; 2003 Oct; 229(1):140-4. PubMed ID: 12925714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Image quality and radiation exposure in digital mammography with storage phosphor screens in a magnification technic].
    Fiedler E; Aichinger U; Böhner C; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Bautz W
    Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):60-4. PubMed ID: 10464507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Quality of digital pre-implant tomography: comparison of film-screen images with storage phosphor images at normal and low dose.
    Ekestubbe A; Gröndahl HG; Molander B
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Sep; 32(5):322-6. PubMed ID: 14709608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Imaging performance with different doses in skeletal radiography: comparison of a needle-structured and a conventional storage phosphor system with a flat-panel detector.
    Wirth S; Treitl M; Reiser MF; Körner M
    Radiology; 2009 Jan; 250(1):152-60. PubMed ID: 19001150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Detection of subtle undisplaced rib fractures in a porcine model: radiation dose requirement--digital flat-panel versus screen-film and storage-phosphor systems.
    Ludwig K; Schülke C; Diederich S; Wormanns D; Lenzen H; Bernhardt TM; Brinckmann P; Heindel W
    Radiology; 2003 Apr; 227(1):163-8. PubMed ID: 12615999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparing image quality of flat-panel chest radiography with storage phosphor radiography and film-screen radiography.
    Ganten M; Radeleff B; Kampschulte A; Daniels MD; Kauffmann GW; Hansmann J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Jul; 181(1):171-6. PubMed ID: 12818852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography.
    Bacher K; Smeets P; Bonnarens K; De Hauwere A; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Oct; 181(4):923-9. PubMed ID: 14500203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Experiences with phantom measurements in different mammographic systems].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Lell M; Kuchar I; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2002 Oct; 174(10):1243-6. PubMed ID: 12375196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography at different exposure doses versus mammography film: possibility of radiation dose reduction in detecting rheumatologic bone defects.
    Zähringer M; Reineck S; Perniok A; Krüger K; Andermahr J; Rubbert A; Winnekendonk G
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Mar; 49(2):157-66. PubMed ID: 18300139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Storage phosphor direct magnification mammography in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography--a phantom study.
    Funke M; Breiter N; Hermann KP; Oestmann JW; Grabbe E
    Br J Radiol; 1998 May; 71(845):528-34. PubMed ID: 9691898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Pediatric musculoskeletal computed radiography.
    Kottamasu SR; Kuhns LR; Stringer DA
    Pediatr Radiol; 1997 Jul; 27(7):563-75. PubMed ID: 9211947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Efficacy of storage phosphor-based digital mammography in diagnosis of breast cancer--comparison with film-screen mammography].
    Kitahama H
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1991 May; 51(5):547-60. PubMed ID: 1651472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Experimental studies on image quality in conventional film screen system, digital phosphor storage plate mammography in mangnification technique and digital mammography in CCD-technique].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2000 Dec; 172(12):965-8. PubMed ID: 11199438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dose reduction in mammography by using imaging plate technology: A retrospective analysis.
    Hittinger M; Mueck F; Wirth S; Hoberg B; Wanninger F; Wallner CP
    Eur J Radiol; 2020 Aug; 129():109140. PubMed ID: 32593077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD).
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Wenkel E; Bautz W
    Rontgenpraxis; 2001; 54(4):123-6. PubMed ID: 11883115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.