177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34665431)
1. Architectural distortion outcome: digital breast tomosynthesis-detected versus digital mammography-detected.
Ahmed SA; Samy M; Ali AM; Hassan RA
Radiol Med; 2022 Jan; 127(1):30-38. PubMed ID: 34665431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Outcome of Architectural Distortion Detected Only at Breast Tomosynthesis versus 2D Mammography.
Alshafeiy TI; Nguyen JV; Rochman CM; Nicholson BT; Patrie JT; Harvey JA
Radiology; 2018 Jul; 288(1):38-46. PubMed ID: 29584593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Digital tomosynthesis spot view in architectural distortions: outcomes in management and radiation dose.
Fiaschetti V; Ubaldi N; De Fazio S; Ricci A; Maspes F; Cossu E
Radiol Med; 2023 Jan; 128(1):35-48. PubMed ID: 36534241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Detection of mammographically occult architectural distortion on digital breast tomosynthesis screening: initial clinical experience.
Partyka L; Lourenco AP; Mainiero MB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Jul; 203(1):216-22. PubMed ID: 24951218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Tomosynthesis-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy of Architectural Distortion Without a Sonographic Correlate: A Retrospective Review.
Ambinder EB; Plotkin A; Euhus D; Mullen LA; Oluyemi E; Di Carlo P; Philip M; Panigrahi B; Cimino-Mathews A; Myers KS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Oct; 217(4):845-854. PubMed ID: 33147055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Pathological outcome of sonographically occult architectural distortions (AD) visible only on digital breast tomosynthesis, and comparison with AD visible also on 2D mammography.
Linda A; Tarricone R; Londero V; Girometti R; Zuiani C
Eur J Radiol; 2022 Jan; 146():110075. PubMed ID: 34864616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of prone and upright, stereotactic, and tomosynthesis-guided biopsies with secondary analysis of ultrasound-occult architectural distortions.
Cohen EO; Korhonen KE; Sun J; Leung JWT
Eur Radiol; 2023 Sep; 33(9):6189-6203. PubMed ID: 37042980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Pathologic Outcomes of Architectural Distortion on Digital 2D Versus Tomosynthesis Mammography.
Bahl M; Lamb LR; Lehman CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Nov; 209(5):1162-1167. PubMed ID: 28834441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in the detection of architectural distortion.
Dibble EH; Lourenco AP; Baird GL; Ward RC; Maynard AS; Mainiero MB
Eur Radiol; 2018 Jan; 28(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 28710582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Digital Mammography Stereotactic Biopsy versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis-guided Biopsy: Differences in Biopsy Targets, Pathologic Results, and Discordance Rates.
Rochat CJ; Baird GL; Lourenco AP
Radiology; 2020 Mar; 294(3):518-527. PubMed ID: 31961261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Assessing the Positive Predictive Value of Architectural Distortion Detected with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in BI-RADS 4 Cases.
Dou E; Ksepka M; Dodelzon K; Shingala PY; Katzen JT
J Breast Imaging; 2020 Nov; 2(6):552-560. PubMed ID: 38424858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Contrast Enhanced Digital Mammography (CEDM) Helps to Safely Reduce Benign Breast Biopsies for Low to Moderately Suspicious Soft Tissue Lesions.
Zuley ML; Bandos AI; Abrams GS; Ganott MA; Gizienski TA; Hakim CM; Kelly AE; Nair BE; Sumkin JH; Waheed U; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 2020 Jul; 27(7):969-976. PubMed ID: 31495761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A New Diagnostic Method for Mass-Like Lesions in Dense Breasts.
Bian T; Lin Q; Cui C; Li L; Qi C; Fei J; Su X
Breast J; 2016 Sep; 22(5):535-40. PubMed ID: 27296324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of Diagnostic Mammography-Guided Biopsy and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis-Guided Biopsy of Suspicious Breast Calcifications: Results in 1354 Biopsies.
Nguyen DL; Boron A; Oluyemi ET; Myers KS; Mullen LA; Ambinder EB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2023 Feb; 220(2):212-223. PubMed ID: 36102725
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Pathologic Outcomes in Single Versus Multiple Areas of Architectural Distortion on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Wang LC; Philip M; Bhole S; Rao S; Gupta D; Schacht D; Friedewald SM; Anders R
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2023 Jan; 220(1):50-62. PubMed ID: 35895298
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Community-Based Breast Cancer Screening Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography: Comparison of Screening Performance and Tumor Characteristics.
Regen-Tuero HC; Ram S; Gass JS; Lourenco AP
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 Feb; 218(2):249-257. PubMed ID: 34523954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of synthetic and digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis or alone for the detection and classification of microcalcifications.
Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Kim GR; Ko ES; Park KW
Eur Radiol; 2019 Jan; 29(1):319-329. PubMed ID: 29931560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Digital breast tomosynthesis plus mammography, magnetic resonance imaging plus mammography and mammography alone: A comparison of diagnostic performance in symptomatic women.
Tang W; Hu FX; Zhu H; Wang QF; Gu YJ; Peng WJ
Clin Hemorheol Microcirc; 2017; 66(2):105-116. PubMed ID: 28211806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Characterization of Breast Masses in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammograms: An Observer Performance Study.
Chan HP; Helvie MA; Hadjiiski L; Jeffries DO; Klein KA; Neal CH; Noroozian M; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA
Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1372-1379. PubMed ID: 28647388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
