BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

196 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34565679)

  • 1. Assessment of the uterine dose in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Cepeda Martins AR; Di Maria S; Afonso J; Pereira M; Pereira J; Vaz P
    Radiography (Lond); 2022 May; 28(2):333-339. PubMed ID: 34565679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Dosimetric characterization and organ dose assessment in digital breast tomosynthesis: Measurements and Monte Carlo simulations using voxel phantoms.
    Baptista M; Di Maria S; Barros S; Figueira C; Sarmento M; Orvalho L; Vaz P
    Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3788-800. PubMed ID: 26133581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of different exposure parameters on radiation dose in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: A phantom study.
    Asbeutah AM; Brindhaban A; AlMajran AA; Asbeutah SA
    Radiography (Lond); 2020 Aug; 26(3):e129-e133. PubMed ID: 32052759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Average glandular dose in paired digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis acquisitions in a population based screening program: effects of measuring breast density, air kerma and beam quality.
    Østerås BH; Skaane P; Gullien R; Martinsen ACT
    Phys Med Biol; 2018 Jan; 63(3):035006. PubMed ID: 29311416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Is there any added value to substitute the 2D digital MLO projection for a MLO tomosynthesis projection and its synthetic view when a 2D standard digital mammography is used in a one-stop-shop immediate reading mammography screening?
    Mesurolle B; El Khoury M; Travade A; Bagard C; Pétrou A; Monghal C
    Eur Radiol; 2021 Dec; 31(12):9529-9539. PubMed ID: 34047846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluation of average glandular dose and investigation of the relationship with compressed breast thickness in dual energy contrast enhanced digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Fusco R; Raiano N; Raiano C; Maio F; Vallone P; Mattace Raso M; Setola SV; Granata V; Rubulotta MR; Barretta ML; Petrosino T; Petrillo A
    Eur J Radiol; 2020 May; 126():108912. PubMed ID: 32151787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative evaluation of average glandular dose and breast cancer detection between single-view digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus single-view digital mammography (DM) and two-view DM: correlation with breast thickness and density.
    Shin SU; Chang JM; Bae MS; Lee SH; Cho N; Seo M; Kim WH; Moon WK
    Eur Radiol; 2015 Jan; 25(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 25182628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Single Center Evaluation of Comparative Breast Radiation dose of Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM), Digital Mammography (DM) and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT).
    Bicchierai G; Busoni S; Tortoli P; Bettarini S; Naro FD; De Benedetto D; Savi E; Bellini C; Miele V; Nori J
    Acad Radiol; 2022 Sep; 29(9):1342-1349. PubMed ID: 35065889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Replacing single-view mediolateral oblique (MLO) digital mammography (DM) with synthesized mammography (SM) with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) images: Comparison of the diagnostic performance and radiation dose with two-view DM with or without MLO-DBT.
    Kang HJ; Chang JM; Lee J; Song SE; Shin SU; Kim WH; Bae MS; Moon WK
    Eur J Radiol; 2016 Nov; 85(11):2042-2048. PubMed ID: 27776658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Radiation dose with digital breast tomosynthesis compared to digital mammography: per-view analysis.
    Gennaro G; Bernardi D; Houssami N
    Eur Radiol; 2018 Feb; 28(2):573-581. PubMed ID: 28819862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Breast Radiation Exposure of 3D Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Compared to Full-Field Digital Mammography in a Clinical Follow-Up Setting.
    Opitz M; Zensen S; Breuckmann K; Bos D; Forsting M; Hoffmann O; Stuschke M; Wetter A; Guberina N
    Diagnostics (Basel); 2022 Feb; 12(2):. PubMed ID: 35204547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Threshold in breast compression reduction for full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Afandy AN; Tori MB; Bintalib SO; Soh BLP
    Radiography (Lond); 2024 Jan; 30(1):217-225. PubMed ID: 38035436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of average glandular dose (AGD) in screening and diagnostic digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) towards establishing a reference dose range band (DRB): a developing country experience.
    Jeyasugiththan J; Maheshika Bandara BGU; Wickramarathna SHD; Thenuwara H; Satharasinghe D; Pallewatte AS; Hettiarachchi P
    J Radiol Prot; 2023 Jul; 43(3):. PubMed ID: 37463573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Normalized glandular dose coefficients in mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis and dedicated breast CT.
    Sarno A; Mettivier G; Di Lillo F; Tucciariello RM; Bliznakova K; Russo P
    Phys Med; 2018 Nov; 55():142-148. PubMed ID: 30314732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparisons of glandular breast dose between digital mammography, tomosynthesis and breast CT based on anthropomorphic patient-derived breast phantoms.
    Sarno A; Mettivier G; Bliznakova K; Hernandez AM; Boone JM; Russo P
    Phys Med; 2022 May; 97():50-58. PubMed ID: 35395535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Radiation dose from digital breast tomosynthesis screening - A comparison with full field digital mammography.
    M Ali RMK; England A; Tootell AK; Hogg P
    J Med Imaging Radiat Sci; 2020 Dec; 51(4):599-603. PubMed ID: 32943362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Clinical digital breast tomosynthesis system: dosimetric characterization.
    Feng SS; Sechopoulos I
    Radiology; 2012 Apr; 263(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 22332070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Phantom-based analysis of variations in automatic exposure control across three mammography systems: implications for radiation dose and image quality in mammography, DBT, and CEM.
    Gennaro G; Del Genio S; Manco G; Caumo F
    Eur Radiol Exp; 2024 Apr; 8(1):49. PubMed ID: 38622388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Regression Analysis between the Different Breast Dose Quantities Reported in Digital Mammography and Patient Age, Breast Thickness, and Acquisition Parameters.
    Dhou S; Dalah E; AlGhafeer R; Hamidu A; Obaideen A
    J Imaging; 2022 Jul; 8(8):. PubMed ID: 36005454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.