362 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32576809)
1. A Cross-Sectional Observational Study to Compare the Role of Ultrasound with Mammography in Women Identified at High Risk for Breast Cancer in a Population in China.
An P; Zhong S; Zhang R; Hou X; Xi R; Wang Y
Med Sci Monit; 2020 Jun; 26():e919777. PubMed ID: 32576809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Recall rate of screening ultrasound with automated breast volumetric scanning (ABVS) in women with dense breasts: a first quarter experience.
Arleo EK; Saleh M; Ionescu D; Drotman M; Min RJ; Hentel K
Clin Imaging; 2014; 38(4):439-444. PubMed ID: 24768327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Application of the downgrade criteria to supplemental screening ultrasound for women with negative mammography but dense breasts.
Kim SY; Kim MJ; Moon HJ; Yoon JH; Kim EK
Medicine (Baltimore); 2016 Nov; 95(44):e5279. PubMed ID: 27858896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The challenge of imaging dense breast parenchyma: is magnetic resonance mammography the technique of choice? A comparative study with x-ray mammography and whole-breast ultrasound.
Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Dominelli V; Cagioli S; Karatasiou A; Pronio A; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
Invest Radiol; 2009 Jul; 44(7):412-21. PubMed ID: 19448554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Performance of hand-held whole-breast ultrasound based on BI-RADS in women with mammographically negative dense breast.
Youk JH; Kim EK; Kim MJ; Kwak JY; Son EJ
Eur Radiol; 2011 Apr; 21(4):667-75. PubMed ID: 20853108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Analysis for the breast cancer screening among urban populations in China, 2012-2013].
Mi ZH; Ren JS; Zhang HZ; Li J; Wang Y; Fang Y; Shi JF; Zhang K; Zhao JB; Dai M
Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2016 Oct; 50(10):887-892. PubMed ID: 27686767
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Sensitivity of screening mammography by density and texture: a cohort study from a population-based screening program in Denmark.
von Euler-Chelpin M; Lillholm M; Vejborg I; Nielsen M; Lynge E
Breast Cancer Res; 2019 Oct; 21(1):111. PubMed ID: 31623646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Screening Ultrasound in Women with Negative Mammography: Outcome Analysis.
Hwang JY; Han BK; Ko EY; Shin JH; Hahn SY; Nam MY
Yonsei Med J; 2015 Sep; 56(5):1352-8. PubMed ID: 26256979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Imaging Phenotypes in Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer on Mammography, Ultrasound, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using the Fifth Edition of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System.
Marino MA; Riedl CC; Bernathova M; Bernhart C; Baltzer PAT; Helbich TH; Pinker K
Eur J Radiol; 2018 Sep; 106():150-159. PubMed ID: 30150038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Automated Breast Ultrasound in Breast Cancer Screening of Women With Dense Breasts: Reader Study of Mammography-Negative and Mammography-Positive Cancers.
Giger ML; Inciardi MF; Edwards A; Papaioannou J; Drukker K; Jiang Y; Brem R; Brown JB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Jun; 206(6):1341-50. PubMed ID: 27043979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. [Comparative analysis of early diagnostic tools for breast cancer].
Shen SJ; Sun Q; Xu YL; Zhou YD; Guan JH; Mao F; Lin Y; Wang XJ; Han SM
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2012 Nov; 34(11):877-80. PubMed ID: 23291142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. BI-RADS Category 5 Assessments at Diagnostic Breast Imaging:Outcomes Analysis Based on Lesion Descriptors.
Yao MM; Joe BN; Sickles EA; Lee CS
Acad Radiol; 2019 Aug; 26(8):1048-1052. PubMed ID: 30195413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Can Ultrasound Elastography Help Better Manage Mammographic BI-RADS Category 4 Breast Lesions?
Gu Y; Tian J; Ran H; Ren W; Chang C; Yuan J; Kang C; Deng Y; Wang H; Luo B; Guo S; Zhou Q; Xue E; Zhan W; Zhou Q; Li J; Zhou P; Zhang C; Chen M; Gu Y; Xu J; Chen W; Zhang Y; Li J; Wang H; Jiang Y
Clin Breast Cancer; 2022 Jun; 22(4):e407-e416. PubMed ID: 34815174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The performance of 3D ABUS versus HHUS in the visualisation and BI-RADS characterisation of breast lesions in a large cohort of 1,886 women.
Vourtsis A; Kachulis A
Eur Radiol; 2018 Feb; 28(2):592-601. PubMed ID: 28828640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Mammography in asymptomatic women aged 40-49 years.
Silva FX; Katz L; Souza AS; Amorim MM
Rev Saude Publica; 2014 Dec; 48(6):931-9. PubMed ID: 26039396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Neddle-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of non-palpable breast cancer].
Becerra-Alcántara GI; Círigo-Villagómez LL; Ramos-Medina F; Robledo-Martínez H; Mar-Merinos CG; Panzi-Altamirano RM
Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2015 Jul; 83(7):400-7. PubMed ID: 26422910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Breast ultrasound diagnostic performance and outcomes for mass lesions using Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 0 mammogram.
Zanello PA; Robim AF; Oliveira TM; Elias Junior J; Andrade JM; Monteiro CR; Sarmento Filho JM; Carrara HH; Muglia VF
Clinics (Sao Paulo); 2011; 66(3):443-8. PubMed ID: 21552670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Follow-Up Intervals for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 Lesions on Screening Ultrasound in Screening and Tertiary Referral Centers.
Huh S; Suh HJ; Kim EK; Kim MJ; Yoon JH; Park VY; Moon HJ
Korean J Radiol; 2020 Sep; 21(9):1027-1035. PubMed ID: 32691538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
