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.
130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32534793)
41. Sonography of Palpable Breast Lumps in a Tertiary Health Care Centre in Nepal. Jha A; Lohani B J Nepal Health Res Counc; 2019 Jan; 16(41):396-400. PubMed ID: 30739928 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. [Imaging diagnostics of breast metastases from extramammary tumors]. Wienbeck S; Nemat S; Lotz J; Surov A Radiologe; 2017 Jun; 57(6):459-465. PubMed ID: 28447112 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. The use of imaging in patients post breast reconstruction. Sim YT; Litherland JC Clin Radiol; 2012 Feb; 67(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 21911216 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Incremental Cancer Detection of Locoregional Restaging with Diagnostic Mammography Combined with Whole-Breast and Regional Nodal Ultrasound in Women with Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer. Candelaria RP; Huang ML; Adrada BE; Bassett R; Hunt KK; Kuerer HM; Smith BD; Chavez-MacGregor M; Yang WT Acad Radiol; 2017 Feb; 24(2):191-199. PubMed ID: 27955877 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. [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]
46. Metastatic nonhematopoietic neoplasms to the breast: a study of 238 cases. Zhou P; Chang N; Abraham SC; Albarracin CT; Huo L; Chen H; Ding Q; Resetkova E; Middleton LP; Sahin AA; Bu H; Wu Y Hum Pathol; 2022 Jul; 125():59-67. PubMed ID: 35447141 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: pathological, clinical, and ultrasonographic findings. A review of the literature. Zandrino F; Calabrese M; Faedda C; Musante F Radiol Med; 2006 Sep; 111(6):773-82. PubMed ID: 16896563 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. 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]
49. (99M)Technetium-sestamibi scintimammography in non-palpable breast lesions found on screening X-ray mammography. Gommans GM; van der Zant FM; van Dongen A; Boer RO; Teule GJ; de Waard JW Eur J Surg Oncol; 2007 Feb; 33(1):23-7. PubMed ID: 17126524 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Triple-negative breast cancers: associations between imaging and pathological findings for triple-negative tumors compared with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative breast cancers. Boisserie-Lacroix M; Macgrogan G; Debled M; Ferron S; Asad-Syed M; McKelvie-Sebileau P; Mathoulin-Pélissier S; Brouste V; Hurtevent-Labrot G Oncologist; 2013; 18(7):802-11. PubMed ID: 23821326 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Breast cancer detection using sonography in women with mammographically dense breasts. Okello J; Kisembo H; Bugeza S; Galukande M BMC Med Imaging; 2014 Dec; 14():41. PubMed ID: 25547239 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging to axillary ultrasound in the detection of axillary nodal metastases in newly diagnosed breast cancer. Assing MA; Patel BK; Karamsadkar N; Weinfurtner J; Usmani O; Kiluk JV; Drukteinis JS Breast J; 2017 Nov; 23(6):647-655. PubMed ID: 28397344 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Basal-like Breast Cancer: Comparison of Imaging Characteristics. Choi BB; Jang HJ; Choi SI Curr Med Imaging; 2020; 16(3):241-248. PubMed ID: 32133954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Mammographic and ultrasonographic features of triple-negative breast cancer: a comparison with other breast cancer subtypes. Kim MY; Choi N Acta Radiol; 2013 Oct; 54(8):889-94. PubMed ID: 23761558 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. 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]
56. Breast Imaging Outcomes following Abnormal Thermography. Neal CH; Flynt KA; Jeffries DO; Helvie MA Acad Radiol; 2018 Mar; 25(3):273-278. PubMed ID: 29275941 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Breast adenomyoepithelioma from a radiologic perspective. Uchida M; Gatica C; Hasson D; Gallegos M; Pinochet MÁ Radiologia (Engl Ed); 2021 Aug; ():. PubMed ID: 34389153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. 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]
59. Ultrasound and Clinical Characteristics of False-negative Results in Mammography Screening of Dense Breasts. Pu H; Peng J; Xu F; Liu N; Wang F; Huang X; Jia Y Clin Breast Cancer; 2020 Aug; 20(4):317-325. PubMed ID: 32229176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]