These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9240665)
1. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography and contrast-enhanced MR imaging in 238 histologically verified breast lesions. Boné B; Péntek Z; Perbeck L; Veress B Acta Radiol; 1997 Jul; 38(4 Pt 1):489-96. PubMed ID: 9240665 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Sensitivity and specificity of MR mammography with histopathological correlation in 250 breasts. Boné B; Aspelin P; Bronge L; Isberg B; Perbeck L; Veress B Acta Radiol; 1996 Mar; 37(2):208-13. PubMed ID: 8600964 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Do mammography, sonography, and MR mammography have a diagnostic benefit compared with mammography and sonography? Müller-Schimpfle M; Stoll P; Stern W; Kurz S; Dammann F; Claussen CD AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 May; 168(5):1323-9. PubMed ID: 9129436 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of breast diseases]. Boné BK; Szabó B; Palkó A; Aspelin P Orv Hetil; 2001 Sep; 142(39):2123-31. PubMed ID: 11723831 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced TurboFLASH subtraction technique. Boetes C; Barentsz JO; Mus RD; van der Sluis RF; van Erning LJ; Hendriks JH; Holland R; Ruys SH Radiology; 1994 Dec; 193(3):777-81. PubMed ID: 7972823 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Dynamic 3D-MR mammography: is there a benefit of sophisticated evaluation of enhancement curves for clinical routine? Müller-Schimpfle M; Ohmenhäuser K; Sand J; Stoll P; Claussen CD J Magn Reson Imaging; 1997; 7(1):236-40. PubMed ID: 9039622 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast in patients with breast implants after cancer surgery. Boné B; Aspelin P; Isberg B; Perbeck L; Veress B Acta Radiol; 1995 Mar; 36(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 7710787 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast MR imaging with commercially available techniques: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Fobben ES; Rubin CZ; Kalisher L; Dembner AG; Seltzer MH; Santoro EJ Radiology; 1995 Jul; 196(1):143-52. PubMed ID: 7784558 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Breast lesions: evaluation with dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging and with T2*-weighted first-pass perfusion MR imaging. Kvistad KA; Rydland J; Vainio J; Smethurst HB; Lundgren S; Fjøsne HE; Haraldseth O Radiology; 2000 Aug; 216(2):545-53. PubMed ID: 10924584 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Berg WA; Gutierrez L; NessAiver MS; Carter WB; Bhargavan M; Lewis RS; Ioffe OB Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):830-49. PubMed ID: 15486214 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value? Westerhof JP; Fischer U; Moritz JD; Oestmann JW Radiology; 1998 Jun; 207(3):675-81. PubMed ID: 9609890 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. MR lesion detection in a breast cancer population. Obdeijn IM; Kuijpers TJ; van Dijk P; Wiggers T; Oudkerk M J Magn Reson Imaging; 1996; 6(6):849-54. PubMed ID: 8956127 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions. Pediconi F; Catalano C; Roselli A; Padula S; Altomari F; Moriconi E; Pronio AM; Kirchin MA; Passariello R Radiology; 2007 Jun; 243(3):670-80. PubMed ID: 17446524 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Stomper PC; Herman S; Klippenstein DL; Winston JS; Edge SB; Arredondo MA; Mazurchuk RV; Blumenson LE Radiology; 1995 Nov; 197(2):387-95. PubMed ID: 7480682 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Diagnostic value of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast]. Winnekendonk G; Krug B; Warm M; Göhring UJ; Mallmann P; Lackner K Rofo; 2004 May; 176(5):688-93. PubMed ID: 15122467 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: MR imaging versus Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography. Helbich TH; Becherer A; Trattnig S; Leitha T; Kelkar P; Seifert M; Gnant M; Staudenherz A; Rudas M; Wolf G; Mostbeck GH Radiology; 1997 Feb; 202(2):421-9. PubMed ID: 9015068 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]