366 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32576809)
21. 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]
22. 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]
23. Comparison of
Liu H; Zhan H; Sun D
BMC Cancer; 2020 May; 20(1):463. PubMed ID: 32448217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Tailored breast cancer screening program with microdose mammography, US, and MR Imaging: short-term results of a pilot study in 40-49-year-old women.
Venturini E; Losio C; Panizza P; Rodighiero MG; Fedele I; Tacchini S; Schiani E; Ravelli S; Cristel G; Panzeri MM; De Cobelli F; Del Maschio A
Radiology; 2013 Aug; 268(2):347-55. PubMed ID: 23579052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Automated and Clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Density Measures Predict Risk for Screen-Detected and Interval Cancers: A Case-Control Study.
Kerlikowske K; Scott CG; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Ma L; Winham S; Jensen MR; Wu FF; Malkov S; Pankratz VS; Cummings SR; Shepherd JA; Brandt KR; Miglioretti DL; Vachon CM
Ann Intern Med; 2018 Jun; 168(11):757-765. PubMed ID: 29710124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [Analysis of the results of mammography screening in Dubrovnik-Neretva County in the 2006-2009 period].
Dzono-Boban A; Mratović MC; Masanović M
Acta Med Croatica; 2010 Dec; 64(5):453-9. PubMed ID: 21692270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Diagnosis of sub-centimetre breast lesions: combining BI-RADS-US with strain elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound-a preliminary study in China.
Xiao X; Jiang Q; Wu H; Guan X; Qin W; Luo B
Eur Radiol; 2017 Jun; 27(6):2443-2450. PubMed ID: 27761708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Combined screening with mammography and ultrasound in a population-based screening program.
Buchberger W; Geiger-Gritsch S; Knapp R; Gautsch K; Oberaigner W
Eur J Radiol; 2018 Apr; 101():24-29. PubMed ID: 29571797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Ultrasound screening of contralateral breast after surgery for breast cancer.
Kim SJ; Chung SY; Chang JM; Cho N; Han W; Moon WK
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jan; 84(1):54-60. PubMed ID: 25458226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The connecticut experiments second year: ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts.
Weigert J; Steenbergen S
Breast J; 2015; 21(2):175-80. PubMed ID: 25683369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Magnetic resonance imaging and breast ultrasonography as an adjunct to mammographic screening in high-risk patients.
Le-Petross HT; Shetty MK
Semin Ultrasound CT MR; 2011 Aug; 32(4):266-72. PubMed ID: 21782116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Choice of imaging method in the work-up of non-calcified breast lesions identified on tomosynthesis screening.
Porembka JH; Baydoun S; Mootz AR; Xi Y; Dogan BE
Eur J Radiol; 2020 Oct; 131():109203. PubMed ID: 32771916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Incorporation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the differential diagnosis for breast lesions with inconsistent results on mammography and conventional ultrasound.
Shao SH; Li CX; Yao MH; Li G; Li X; Wu R
Clin Hemorheol Microcirc; 2020; 74(4):463-473. PubMed ID: 31868661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK
Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Retroareolar masses and intraductal abnormalities detected on screening ultrasound: can biopsy be avoided?
Guo Y; Raghu M; Durand M; Hooley R
Br J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 91(1090):20170816. PubMed ID: 29338316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41.
Hooley RJ; Greenberg KL; Stackhouse RM; Geisel JL; Butler RS; Philpotts LE
Radiology; 2012 Oct; 265(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 22723501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. [Diagnostic mammography and sonography: concordance of the breast imaging reporting assessments and final clinical outcome].
Lorenzen J; Wedel AK; Lisboa BW; Löning T; Adam G
Rofo; 2005 Nov; 177(11):1545-51. PubMed ID: 16302136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Overall assessment system of combined mammography and ultrasound for breast cancer screening in Japan.
Ohnuki K; Tohno E; Tsunoda H; Uematsu T; Nakajima Y
Breast Cancer; 2021 Mar; 28(2):254-262. PubMed ID: 33389614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Reassessment and Follow-Up Results of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Detected on Screening Breast Ultrasound.
Chae EY; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ; Kim HH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Mar; 206(3):666-72. PubMed ID: 26901026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
