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

540 related items for PubMed ID: 9129436

  • 1. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Incidental findings on sonography of the breast: clinical significance and diagnostic workup.
    Buchberger W, DeKoekkoek-Doll P, Springer P, Obrist P, Dünser M.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Oct; 173(4):921-7. PubMed ID: 10511149
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging.
    Gilles R, Guinebretière JM, Lucidarme O, Cluzel P, Janaud G, Finet JF, Tardivon A, Masselot J, Vanel D.
    Radiology; 1994 Jun; 191(3):625-31. PubMed ID: 8184038
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Evaluation of the three-time-point method for diagnosis of breast lesions in contrast-enhanced MR mammography.
    Hauth EA, Stockamp C, Maderwald S, Mühler A, Kimmig R, Jaeger H, Barkhausen J, Forsting M.
    Clin Imaging; 2006 Jun; 30(3):160-5. PubMed ID: 16632149
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. 201Tl scintigraphy in the evaluation of palpable and nonpalpable breast lesions: correlation with mammography and ultrasonography.
    Vural G, Atasever T, Ozdemir A, Oznur I, Karabacak NI, Gökçora N, Işik S, Unlü M.
    Nuklearmedizin; 1997 Dec; 36(8):282-8. PubMed ID: 17068879
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Characterization of breast lesions with CE-MR multimodal morphological and kinetic analysis: comparison with conventional mammography and high-resolution ultrasound.
    Vassiou K, Kanavou T, Vlychou M, Poultsidi A, Athanasiou E, Arvanitis DL, Fezoulidis IV.
    Eur J Radiol; 2009 Apr; 70(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 18295425
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Comparative signal intensity measurements in dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR mammography.
    Gribbestad IS, Nilsen G, Fjøsne HE, Kvinnsland S, Haugen OA, Rinck PA.
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 1994 Apr; 4(3):477-80. PubMed ID: 8061451
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 27.