86 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3901112)
1. Whole-breast US imaging: four-year follow-up.
Kopans DB; Meyer JE; Lindfors KK
Radiology; 1985 Nov; 157(2):505-7. PubMed ID: 3901112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations.
Kolb TM; Lichy J; Newhouse JH
Radiology; 2002 Oct; 225(1):165-75. PubMed ID: 12355001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Short-term follow-up of palpable breast lesions with benign imaging features: evaluation of 375 lesions in 320 women.
Harvey JA; Nicholson BT; Lorusso AP; Cohen MA; Bovbjerg VE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Dec; 193(6):1723-30. PubMed ID: 19933671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted?
Graf O; Helbich TH; Fuchsjaeger MH; Hopf G; Morgun M; Graf C; Mallek R; Sickles EA
Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):850-6. PubMed ID: 15486217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Light scanning versus mammography in breast cancer detection.
Monsees B; Destouet JM; Totty WG
Radiology; 1987 May; 163(2):463-5. PubMed ID: 3562828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The abnormal mammogram in women with clinically normal breasts.
Sterns EE
Can J Surg; 1995 Apr; 38(2):168-72. PubMed ID: 7728672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Negative predictive value of sonography with mammography in patients with palpable breast lesions.
Soo MS; Rosen EL; Baker JA; Vo TT; Boyd BA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2001 Nov; 177(5):1167-70. PubMed ID: 11641195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mammography and ultrasound in the diagnosis of contralateral breast cancer.
Rissanen TJ; Mäkäräinen HP; Apaja-Sarkkinen MA; Lindholm EL
Acta Radiol; 1995 Jul; 36(4):358-66. PubMed ID: 7619612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial.
Kuhl C; Weigel S; Schrading S; Arand B; Bieling H; König R; Tombach B; Leutner C; Rieber-Brambs A; Nordhoff D; Heindel W; Reiser M; Schild HH
J Clin Oncol; 2010 Mar; 28(9):1450-7. PubMed ID: 20177029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Small (< 2.0-cm) breast cancers: mammographic and US findings at US-guided cryoablation--initial experience.
Roubidoux MA; Sabel MS; Bailey JE; Kleer CG; Klein KA; Helvie MA
Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):857-67. PubMed ID: 15567802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [The use of echography and US-guided percutaneous puncture in addition to mammography for the detection of malignant breast tumors].
Matricardi L; Lovati R; Nazzaro V; Guarneri A; Calzoni G; Gagliano E; Donato F
Radiol Med; 1992 Apr; 83(4):395-401. PubMed ID: 1318561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen April 1991-March 1997. Mammography Screening Evaluation Group.
Lynge E
APMIS Suppl; 1998; 83():1-44. PubMed ID: 9850674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Detection of breast carcinoma: comparison of automated water-path whole-breast sonography, mammography, and physical examination.
Egan RL; Egan KL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1984 Sep; 143(3):493-7. PubMed ID: 6331727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results.
Kuhl CK; Schmutzler RK; Leutner CC; Kempe A; Wardelmann E; Hocke A; Maringa M; Pfeifer U; Krebs D; Schild HH
Radiology; 2000 Apr; 215(1):267-79. PubMed ID: 10751498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Twenty-year follow-up breast screening project.
Letton AH; Mason EM; Ramshaw B
J Med Assoc Ga; 1996 Jan; 85(1):31-2. PubMed ID: 8583185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast improves detection of invasive cancer, preinvasive cancer, and premalignant lesions during surveillance of women at high risk for breast cancer.
Riedl CC; Ponhold L; Flöry D; Weber M; Kroiss R; Wagner T; Fuchsjäger M; Helbich TH
Clin Cancer Res; 2007 Oct; 13(20):6144-52. PubMed ID: 17947480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [The "EVA" Trial: Evaluation of the Efficacy of Diagnostic Methods (Mammography, Ultrasound, MRI) in the secondary and tertiary prevention of familial breast cancer. Preliminary results after the first half of the study period].
Kuhl CK; Schrading S; Weigel S; Nüssle-Kügele K; Sittek H; Arand B; Morakkabati N; Leutner C; Tombach B; Nordhoff D; Perlet C; Rieber A; Heindel W; Brambs HJ; Schild H
Rofo; 2005 Jun; 177(6):818-27. PubMed ID: 15902631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Breast biopsy avoidance: the value of normal mammograms and normal sonograms in the setting of a palpable lump.
Dennis MA; Parker SH; Klaus AJ; Stavros AT; Kaske TI; Clark SB
Radiology; 2001 Apr; 219(1):186-91. PubMed ID: 11274555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Breast cancers detected by breast MRI screening and ultrasound in asymptomatic Asian women: 8 years of experience in Taiwan.
Cheng YC; Wu NY; Ko JS; Lin PW; Lin WC; Juang SJ; Tsai TT; Chang CY; Chen JH; Cheng HC
Oncology; 2012; 82(2):98-107. PubMed ID: 22328009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A decade of breast cancer screening in The Netherlands: trends in the preoperative diagnosis of breast cancer.
Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Roumen RM; de Koning HJ; Plaisier ML; Fracheboud J
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Nov; 106(1):113-9. PubMed ID: 17219049
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
