193 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32691538)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Comparison of
Liu H; Zhan H; Sun D
BMC Cancer; 2020 May; 20(1):463. PubMed ID: 32448217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Follow-up interval for probably benign breast lesions on screening ultrasound in women at average risk for breast cancer with dense breasts.
Moon HJ; Kim MJ; Yoon JH; Kim EK
Acta Radiol; 2018 Sep; 59(9):1045-1050. PubMed ID: 29231050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Long-term Surveillance of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ Detected with Screening Mammography versus US: Factors Associated with Second Breast Cancer.
Choi SH; Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Ko ES; Park KW
Radiology; 2019 Jul; 292(1):37-48. PubMed ID: 31038406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Probably benign lesions at screening breast US in a population with elevated risk: prevalence and rate of malignancy in the ACRIN 6666 trial.
Barr RG; Zhang Z; Cormack JB; Mendelson EB; Berg WA
Radiology; 2013 Dec; 269(3):701-12. PubMed ID: 23962417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Longitudinal measurement of clinical mammographic breast density to improve estimation of breast cancer risk.
Kerlikowske K; Ichikawa L; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Vacek PM; Smith-Bindman R; Yankaskas B; Carney PA; Ballard-Barbash R;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Mar; 99(5):386-95. PubMed ID: 17341730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Predictors of Invasive Breast Cancer in Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Ultrasound-Guided Core Needle Biopsy.
Shin YJ; Kim SM; Yun B; Jang M; Kim B; Lee SH
J Ultrasound Med; 2019 Feb; 38(2):481-488. PubMed ID: 30069893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Asymptomatic Benign Papilloma Without Atypia Diagnosed at Ultrasonography-Guided 14-Gauge Core Needle Biopsy: Which Subgroup can be Managed by Observation?
Kim SY; Kim EK; Lee HS; Kim MJ; Yoon JH; Koo JS; Moon HJ
Ann Surg Oncol; 2016 Jun; 23(6):1860-6. PubMed ID: 26920388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Growing BI-RADS category 3 lesions on follow-up breast ultrasound: malignancy rates and worrisome features.
Ha SM; Chae EY; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ; Kim HH
Br J Radiol; 2018 Jul; 91(1087):20170787. PubMed ID: 29658793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cancer Yield and Patterns of Follow-up for BI-RADS Category 3 after Screening Mammography Recall in the National Mammography Database.
Berg WA; Berg JM; Sickles EA; Burnside ES; Zuley ML; Rosenberg RD; Lee CS
Radiology; 2020 Jul; 296(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 32427557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. The supplemental value of mammographic screening over breast MRI alone in BRCA2 mutation carriers.
Obdeijn IM; Mann RM; Loo CCE; Lobbes M; Voormolen EMC; van Deurzen CHM; de Bock G; ; Hooning MJ
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2020 Jun; 181(3):581-588. PubMed ID: 32333294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
