149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9039622)
21. MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations.
Kaiser WA; Zeitler E
Radiology; 1989 Mar; 170(3 Pt 1):681-6. PubMed ID: 2916021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Breast lesion detection and characterization at contrast-enhanced MR mammography: gadobenate dimeglumine versus gadopentetate dimeglumine.
Pediconi F; Catalano C; Occhiato R; Venditti F; Fraioli F; Napoli A; Kirchin MA; Passariello R
Radiology; 2005 Oct; 237(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 16126926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: comparison of two different doses of gadopentetate dimeglumine.
Heywang-Köbrunner SH; Haustein J; Pohl C; Beck R; Lommatzsch B; Untch M; Nathrath WB
Radiology; 1994 Jun; 191(3):639-46. PubMed ID: 8184040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Benign versus malignant breast disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced MR imaging and Tc-99m tetrofosmin scintimammography.
Fenlon HM; Phelan NC; O'Sullivan P; Tierney S; Gorey T; Ennis JT
Radiology; 1997 Oct; 205(1):214-20. PubMed ID: 9314988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. A new contrast in MR mammography by means of chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) imaging at 3 Tesla: preliminary results.
Schmitt B; Zamecnik P; Zaiss M; Rerich E; Schuster L; Bachert P; Schlemmer HP
Rofo; 2011 Nov; 183(11):1030-6. PubMed ID: 22034086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [Focal and diffuse lesions in dynamic MR-mammography of healthy probands].
Kuhl CK; Seibert C; Sommer T; Kreft B; Gieseke J; Schild HH
Rofo; 1995 Sep; 163(3):219-24. PubMed ID: 7548868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Differentiation between benign and malignant findings on MR-mammography: usefulness of morphological criteria.
Wedegärtner U; Bick U; Wörtler K; Rummeny E; Bongartz G
Eur Radiol; 2001; 11(9):1645-50. PubMed ID: 11511885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model.
Tofts PS; Berkowitz B; Schnall MD
Magn Reson Med; 1995 Apr; 33(4):564-8. PubMed ID: 7776889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Breast neoplasms: T2* susceptibility-contrast, first-pass perfusion MR imaging.
Kuhl CK; Bieling H; Gieseke J; Ebel T; Mielcarek P; Far F; Folkers P; Elevelt A; Schild HH
Radiology; 1997 Jan; 202(1):87-95. PubMed ID: 8988196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Subtraction and dynamic MR images of breast cancer].
Murakami Y; Aoki M; Harada J
Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1993 Apr; 53(4):375-86. PubMed ID: 8493070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Macromolecular contrast agents for MR mammography: current status.
Daldrup-Link HE; Brasch RC
Eur Radiol; 2003 Feb; 13(2):354-65. PubMed ID: 12599002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. [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]
33. Magnetic resonance mammography in small vs. advanced breast lesions - systematic comparison reveals significant impact of lesion size on diagnostic accuracy in 936 histologically verified breast lesions.
Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Vag T; Gröschel T; Richter C; Burmeister H; Kaiser WA
Rofo; 2011 Feb; 183(2):126-35. PubMed ID: 20830650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Value of MR mammography in the detection and exclusion of recurrent breast carcinoma.
Rieber A; Merkle E; Zeitler H; Görich J; Kreienberg R; Brambs HJ; Tomczak R
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1997; 21(5):780-4. PubMed ID: 9294575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Effects of partial volume and phase shift between fat and water in gradient-echo magnetic resonance-mammography.
Peller M; Stehling MK; Sittek H; Kessler M; Reiser M
MAGMA; 1996 Jun; 4(2):105-13. PubMed ID: 8875396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Dynamic magnetic resonance mammography of both breasts following local excision and radiotherapy for breast carcinoma.
Murray AD; Redpath TW; Needham G; Gilbert FJ; Brookes JA; Eremin O
Br J Radiol; 1996 Jul; 69(823):594-600. PubMed ID: 8696694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. [Quantitative parametric analysis of contrast-enhanced lesions in dynamic MR mammography].
Hauth EA; Jaeger H; Maderwald S; Mühler A; Kimmig R; Forsting M
Radiologe; 2008 Jun; 48(6):593-600. PubMed ID: 18004537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Characterization of focal hepatic masses by dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging: findings in 311 lesions.
Quillin SP; Atilla S; Brown JJ; Borrello JA; Yu CY; Pilgram TK
Magn Reson Imaging; 1997; 15(3):275-85. PubMed ID: 9201674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast.
Heywang-Köbrunner SH
Invest Radiol; 1994 Jan; 29(1):94-104. PubMed ID: 8144345
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Functional evaluation of transplanted kidneys by Gd-DTPA enhanced turbo FLASH MR imaging.
Nakashima R; Yamashita Y; Tomiguchi S; Tsuji A; Takahashi M
Radiat Med; 1996; 14(5):251-6. PubMed ID: 8988504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
