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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

64 related items for PubMed ID: 8430593

  • 1. Interpreting the mammogram report.
    Olson LK.
    Am Fam Physician; 1993 Feb 01; 47(2):396-403. PubMed ID: 8430593
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Analysis of mammographically obvious carcinomas of the breast with benign results upon initial biopsy.
    Meyer JE, Kopans DB.
    Surg Gynecol Obstet; 1981 Oct 01; 153(4):570-2. PubMed ID: 6269239
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. The abnormal mammogram radiographic findings, diagnostic options, pathology, and stage of cancer diagnosis.
    McKenna RJ.
    Cancer; 1994 Jul 01; 74(1 Suppl):244-55. PubMed ID: 8004594
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Mammography in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.
    Stomper PC, Gelman RS.
    Hematol Oncol Clin North Am; 1989 Dec 01; 3(4):611-40. PubMed ID: 2691492
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Mammographic abnormalities and the detection of carcinoma of the breast.
    Hall JA, Murphy DC, Hall BR, Hall KA.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Jun 01; 168(6 Pt 1):1677-80; discussion 1680-2. PubMed ID: 8317508
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. 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 01; 233(3):850-6. PubMed ID: 15486217
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. The prevalence of carcinoma in palpable vs impalpable, mammographically detected lesions.
    Bassett LW, Liu TH, Giuliano AE, Gold RH.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1991 Jul 01; 157(1):21-4. PubMed ID: 1646562
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. A prospective study of double diagnosis of nonpalpable lesions of the breast.
    Dowlatshahi K, Jokich PM, Kluskens LF, Patel R, Economou SG.
    Surg Gynecol Obstet; 1991 Feb 01; 172(2):121-4. PubMed ID: 1846452
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. [Mammary microcalcifications: is there a consensus on interpretation and management?].
    Raudrant D, Chomier M, Landrivon G, Ecochard R, Daville O, Champion F, Guillaud M.
    Bull Cancer; 1992 Feb 01; 79(5):451-8. PubMed ID: 1421707
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Efficacy of specimen radiography of clinically occult noncalcified breast lesions.
    Stomper PC, Davis SP, Sonnenfeld MR, Meyer JE, Greenes RA, Eberlein TJ.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1988 Jul 01; 151(1):43-7. PubMed ID: 3259819
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Stereotactic core biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions.
    Strong JW, Worsham GF, Austin RM, Gruber FH, Bagg MN.
    J S C Med Assoc; 1995 Dec 01; 91(12):489-96. PubMed ID: 8587312
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. The impact of mammography on breast biopsy.
    Goedde TA, Frykberg ER, Crump JM, Lay SF, Turetsky DB, Linden SS.
    Am Surg; 1992 Nov 01; 58(11):661-6. PubMed ID: 1485695
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 4.