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.
132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34155990)
1. DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS AND FULL-FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY IN BREAST CANCER DETECTION ASSOCIATED WITH FOUR ASYMMETRY TYPES. Gurando AV; Babkina TM; Dykan IM; Kozarenko TM; Gurando VR; Telniy VV Wiad Lek; 2021; 74(4):842-848. PubMed ID: 34155990 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. DETECTION OF BREAST CANCERS REPRESENTED AS ARCHITECTURAL DISTORTION: A COMPARISON OF FULL-FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY AND DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS. Babkina TM; Gurando AV; Kozarenko TM; Gurando VR; Telniy VV; Pominchuk DV Wiad Lek; 2021; 74(7):1674-1679. PubMed ID: 34459770 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Detection of breast cancer presenting as a mass in women with dense breasts - digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography. Babkina TM; Dykan IM; Gurando AV; Suleimenova DM; Kozarenko TM; Bozhok YM; Stuley VA Exp Oncol; 2020 Sep; 42(3):215-219. PubMed ID: 32996743 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison. Spangler ML; Zuley ML; Sumkin JH; Abrams G; Ganott MA; Hakim C; Perrin R; Chough DM; Shah R; Gur D AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Feb; 196(2):320-4. PubMed ID: 21257882 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. BI-RADS Category 3 Comparison: Probably Benign Category after Recall from Screening before and after Implementation of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. McDonald ES; McCarthy AM; Weinstein SP; Schnall MD; Conant EF Radiology; 2017 Dec; 285(3):778-787. PubMed ID: 28715278 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Developing Asymmetries without Sonographic Correlate at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. Liang A; Baraban E; Myers KS; Mullen LA; Panigrahi B; Oluyemi E; Cimino-Mathews A; Ambinder EB Radiology; 2022 Mar; 302(3):525-532. PubMed ID: 34874203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. Friedewald SM; Rafferty EA; Rose SL; Durand MA; Plecha DM; Greenberg JS; Hayes MK; Copit DS; Carlson KL; Cink TM; Barke LD; Greer LN; Miller DP; Conant EF JAMA; 2014 Jun; 311(24):2499-507. PubMed ID: 25058084 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis in Breast Cancer Screening: The Oslo Tomosynthesis Screening Trial. Skaane P; Bandos AI; Niklason LT; Sebuødegård S; Østerås BH; Gullien R; Gur D; Hofvind S Radiology; 2019 Apr; 291(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 30777808 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. One-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (MBTST): a prospective, population-based, diagnostic accuracy study. Zackrisson S; Lång K; Rosso A; Johnson K; Dustler M; Förnvik D; Förnvik H; Sartor H; Timberg P; Tingberg A; Andersson I Lancet Oncol; 2018 Nov; 19(11):1493-1503. PubMed ID: 30322817 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical implementation of synthesized mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis in a routine clinical practice. Freer PE; Riegert J; Eisenmenger L; Ose D; Winkler N; Stein MA; Stoddard GJ; Hess R Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Nov; 166(2):501-509. PubMed ID: 28780702 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The impact of adjunctive tomosynthesis on screening mammography outcomes in two widely diverse radiology practices. Poplack SP; Patel AK; Salter A; Langley Blanton H; Murray D; McGuire C Breast J; 2021 Jan; 27(1):13-20. PubMed ID: 33274490 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of synthetic mammography, reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis, and digital mammography: evaluation of lesion conspicuity and BI-RADS assessment categories. Mariscotti G; Durando M; Houssami N; Fasciano M; Tagliafico A; Bosco D; Casella C; Bogetti C; Bergamasco L; Fonio P; Gandini G Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Dec; 166(3):765-773. PubMed ID: 28819781 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Lesion conspicuity on synthetic screening mammography compared to full field digital screening mammography. Giess CS; Raza S; Denison CM; Yeh ED; Gombos EC; Frost EP; Bay CP; Chikarmane SA Clin Imaging; 2021 Jul; 75():90-96. PubMed ID: 33508756 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Tomosynthesis in the Diagnostic Setting: Changing Rates of BI-RADS Final Assessment over Time. Raghu M; Durand MA; Andrejeva L; Goehler A; Michalski MH; Geisel JL; Hooley RJ; Horvath LJ; Butler R; Forman HP; Philpotts LE Radiology; 2016 Oct; 281(1):54-61. PubMed ID: 27139264 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis. Skaane P Breast Cancer; 2017 Jan; 24(1):32-41. PubMed ID: 27138386 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Value of one-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in diagnostic workup of women with clinical signs and symptoms and in women recalled from screening. Waldherr C; Cerny P; Altermatt HJ; Berclaz G; Ciriolo M; Buser K; Sonnenschein MJ AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Jan; 200(1):226-31. PubMed ID: 23255766 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Dense Breast Ultrasound Screening After Digital Mammography Versus After Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. Dibble EH; Singer TM; Jimoh N; Baird GL; Lourenco AP AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2019 Dec; 213(6):1397-1402. PubMed ID: 31553658 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]