173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38021193)
1. Diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam breast computed tomography and head-to-head comparison of digital mammography, magnetic resonance imaging and cone-beam breast computed tomography for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Gong W; Zhu J; Hong C; Liu X; Li S; Chen Y; Zhang B; Li X
Gland Surg; 2023 Oct; 12(10):1360-1374. PubMed ID: 38021193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Head-to-head comparison of cone-beam breast computed tomography and mammography in the diagnosis of primary breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Yang L; Zhou Z; Wang J; Lin Q; Dong Y; Guo Z; Shi F
Eur J Radiol; 2024 Feb; 171():111292. PubMed ID: 38211395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Approach.
Komolafe TE; Zhang C; Olagbaju OA; Yuan G; Du Q; Li M; Zheng J; Yang X
Sensors (Basel); 2022 May; 22(9):. PubMed ID: 35591290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast-CT (CBBCT): clinical performance compared to mammography and MRI.
Wienbeck S; Fischer U; Luftner-Nagel S; Lotz J; Uhlig J
Eur Radiol; 2018 Sep; 28(9):3731-3741. PubMed ID: 29594402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam breast computed tomography: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis.
Uhlig J; Uhlig A; Biggemann L; Fischer U; Lotz J; Wienbeck S
Eur Radiol; 2019 Mar; 29(3):1194-1202. PubMed ID: 30255249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Comparison of the diagnostic efficiency in breast malignancy between cone beam breast CT and mammography in dense breast].
Liu AD; Ma Y; Yin L; Han P; Li HJ; Ye ZX
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2018 Aug; 40(8):604-609. PubMed ID: 30139031
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The role of cone-beam breast-CT for breast cancer detection relative to breast density.
Wienbeck S; Uhlig J; Luftner-Nagel S; Zapf A; Surov A; von Fintel E; Stahnke V; Lotz J; Fischer U
Eur Radiol; 2017 Dec; 27(12):5185-5195. PubMed ID: 28677053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Pre- and post-contrast versus post-contrast cone-beam breast CT: can we reduce radiation exposure while maintaining diagnostic accuracy?
Uhlig J; Fischer U; Biggemann L; Lotz J; Wienbeck S
Eur Radiol; 2019 Jun; 29(6):3141-3148. PubMed ID: 30488110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of Preoperative Contrast-enhanced Cone Beam Breast CT in Assessment of Residual Tumor after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Comparative Study with Breast MRI.
Wang Y; Zhao M; Ma Y; Liu A; Zhu Y; Yin L; Liang Z; Qu Z; Lu H; Ma Y; Ye Z
Acad Radiol; 2023 Sep; 30(9):1805-1815. PubMed ID: 36610931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Cone beam breast CT with multiplanar and three dimensional visualization in differentiating breast masses compared with mammography.
Zhao B; Zhang X; Cai W; Conover D; Ning R
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jan; 84(1):48-53. PubMed ID: 25439008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of comfort between cone beam breast computed tomography and digital mammography.
Li H; Yin L; He N; Han P; Zhu Y; Ma Y; Liu A; Lu H; Gao Z; Liu P; Wu Y; Ye Z
Eur J Radiol; 2019 Nov; 120():108674. PubMed ID: 31557718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Dedicated Cone-beam Breast Computed Tomography and Diagnostic Mammography: Comparison of Radiation Dose, Patient Comfort, And Qualitative Review of Imaging Findings in BI-RADS 4 and 5 Lesions.
O'Connell AM; Kawakyu-O'Connor D
J Clin Imaging Sci; 2012; 2():7. PubMed ID: 22439131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT) and breast MRI.
Ma Y; Liu A; Zhang Y; Zhu Y; Wang Y; Zhao M; Liang Z; Qu Z; Yin L; Lu H; Ye Z
Eur Radiol; 2022 Aug; 32(8):5773-5782. PubMed ID: 35320411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. CT values of contrast-enhanced CBBCT: A useful diagnostic tool for benign and malignant breast lesions.
Wei W; Yi XL; Yang J; Liao H; Su D
Acta Radiol; 2023 Aug; 64(8):2379-2386. PubMed ID: 37287251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of propagation-based CT using synchrotron radiation and conventional cone-beam CT for breast imaging.
Tavakoli Taba S; Baran P; Nesterets YI; Pacile S; Wienbeck S; Dullin C; Pavlov K; Maksimenko A; Lockie D; Mayo SC; Quiney HM; Dreossi D; Arfelli F; Tromba G; Lewis S; Gureyev TE; Brennan PC
Eur Radiol; 2020 May; 30(5):2740-2750. PubMed ID: 31974689
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison between cone-beam breast-CT and full-field digital mammography for microcalcification detection depending on breast density.
Wienbeck S; Andrijevska V; Kück F; Perske C; Unterberg-Buchwald C; Fischer U; Lotz J; Kunze M
Medicine (Baltimore); 2023 Jun; 102(22):e33900. PubMed ID: 37266644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A Reliability Comparison of Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography and Mammography: Breast Density Assessment Referring to the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas.
Ma Y; Cao Y; Liu A; Yin L; Han P; Li H; Zhang X; Ye Z
Acad Radiol; 2019 Jun; 26(6):752-759. PubMed ID: 30220584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer detection: a diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis.
Alabousi M; Zha N; Salameh JP; Samoilov L; Sharifabadi AD; Pozdnyakov A; Sadeghirad B; Freitas V; McInnes MDF; Alabousi A
Eur Radiol; 2020 Apr; 30(4):2058-2071. PubMed ID: 31900699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cancer screening with digital mammography for women at average risk for breast cancer, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for women at high risk: an evidence-based analysis.
Medical Advisory Secretariat
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2010; 10(3):1-55. PubMed ID: 23074406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Correlation between contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast computed tomography features and prognostic staging in breast cancer.
Ma WM; Li J; Chen SG; Cai PQ; Chen S; Chen JT; Zhou CY; He N; Wu Y
Br J Radiol; 2022 Apr; 95(1132):20210466. PubMed ID: 34930038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
