634 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8557506)
41. Breast MRI: early experience with a 3-D fat-suppressed gradient echo sequence in the evaluation of breast lesions.
Holden A; Anderson JE; Ives FJ; Taylor D; Wylie EJ; Adamson R
Australas Radiol; 1996 Nov; 40(4):391-7. PubMed ID: 8996898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. CE-Magnetic Resonance Mammography for the evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed breast cancer.
Pediconi F; Venditti F; Padula S; Roselli A; Moriconi E; Giacomelli L; Catalano C; Passariello R
Radiol Med; 2005; 110(1-2):61-8. PubMed ID: 16163140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Peripheral enhancement and spatial contrast uptake heterogeneity of primary breast tumours: quantitative assessment with dynamic MRI.
Mussurakis S; Gibbs P; Horsman A
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1998; 22(1):35-46. PubMed ID: 9448759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Assessment of local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy with MRI.
Muüller RD; Barkhausen J; Sauerwein W; Langer R
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1998; 22(3):408-12. PubMed ID: 9606381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Automatic identification and classification of characteristic kinetic curves of breast lesions on DCE-MRI.
Chen W; Giger ML; Bick U; Newstead GM
Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2878-87. PubMed ID: 16964864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Paradoxic uptake of Gd-EOB-DTPA by hepatocellular carcinoma in mice: quantitative image analysis.
Fujita M; Yamamoto R; Takahashi M; Tsuji T; Yamanaka T; Miyazawa T; Fritz-Zieroth B; Terada N; Kuroda C
J Magn Reson Imaging; 1997; 7(4):768-70. PubMed ID: 9243401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA enhancement: comparison with mammography and ultrasonography.
Hachiya J; Seki T; Okada M; Nitatori T; Korenaga T; Furuya Y
Radiat Med; 1991; 9(6):232-40. PubMed ID: 1668410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent.
Boetes C; Mus RD; Holland R; Barentsz JO; Strijk SP; Wobbes T; Hendriks JH; Ruys SH
Radiology; 1995 Dec; 197(3):743-7. PubMed ID: 7480749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. [MR mammography at 0.5 tesla. II. The capacity to differentiate malignant and benign lesions in MR mammography at 0.5 and 1.5 T].
Kuhl CK; Kreft BP; Hauswirth A; Gieseke J; Elevelt A; Reiser M; Schild HH
Rofo; 1995 Jun; 162(6):482-91. PubMed ID: 7605960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. [Quantitative assessment of therapy related effects after breast conserving therapy with dynamic MRI of the breast].
Wersebe A; Xydeas T; Clauss T; Dietz K; Belka C; Fersis N; Claussen CD; Müller-Schimpfle M
Rofo; 2001 Dec; 173(12):1109-17. PubMed ID: 11740672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Pharmacokinetic parameters in CNS Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging.
Brix G; Semmler W; Port R; Schad LR; Layer G; Lorenz WJ
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1991; 15(4):621-8. PubMed ID: 2061479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Discrimination of benign and malignant breast lesions by using shutter-speed dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.
Huang W; Tudorica LA; Li X; Thakur SB; Chen Y; Morris EA; Tagge IJ; Korenblit ME; Rooney WD; Koutcher JA; Springer CS
Radiology; 2011 Nov; 261(2):394-403. PubMed ID: 21828189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. The indeterminate breast mass: assessment using contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.
Hickman PF; Moore NR; Shepstone BJ
Br J Radiol; 1994 Jan; 67(793):14-20. PubMed ID: 8298869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Background parenchymal signal enhancement ratio at preoperative MR imaging: association with subsequent local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ after breast conservation surgery.
Kim SA; Cho N; Ryu EB; Seo M; Bae MS; Chang JM; Moon WK
Radiology; 2014 Mar; 270(3):699-707. PubMed ID: 24126372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-DTPA, a new liver-specific magnetic resonance contrast agent. Kinetic and enhancement patterns in normal and cholestatic rats.
Clément O; Mühler A; Vexler V; Berthezène Y; Brasch RC
Invest Radiol; 1992 Aug; 27(8):612-9. PubMed ID: 1428739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Dynamic MR mammography: a technique for potentially reducing the biopsy rate for benign breast disease.
Turkat TJ; Klein BD; Polan RL; Richman RH
J Magn Reson Imaging; 1994; 4(4):563-8. PubMed ID: 7949682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Evaluation of mammographic breast lesions with Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography and contrast enhanced MRI.
Sommer H; Tiling R; Pechmann M; Kindermann G; Kress K; Moser R; Tatsch K; Hahn K; Pfluger T; Assemi C
Zentralbl Gynakol; 1997; 119(1):6-11. PubMed ID: 9050197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Magnetic Resonance Female Breast Imaging (MRFBI) - Evaluation of the Changes in Signal Intensity over Time Pre- and Post-administration of 0.2 mmol/kg Gd-DTPA.
Schedel H; Oellinger H; Kohlschein P; Siewert C; Hadijuana J; Blohmer JU; Kissner T; Felix R
Zentralbl Gynakol; 2002 Feb; 124(2):104-10. PubMed ID: 11935495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. [Dynamic imaging with magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of breast disease].
Ercolani P; Giovagnoni A; Giuseppetti G; Baldassarre S; De Nigris E; Amici F
Radiol Med; 1991 Oct; 82(4):422-6. PubMed ID: 1767046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Is there a correlation in breast carcinomas between tumor size and number of tumor vessels detected by gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography?
Siewert C; Oellinger H; Sherif HK; Blohmer JU; Hadijuana J; Felix R
MAGMA; 1997 Mar; 5(1):29-31. PubMed ID: 9219176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
