146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20116191)
1. Complex cystic lesions of the breast on ultrasonography: feature analysis and BI-RADS assessment.
Hsu HH; Yu JC; Lee HS; Lin WC; Chang WC; Tung HJ; Huang GS; Hsu GC
Eur J Radiol; 2011 Jul; 79(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 20116191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Non-mass-like breast lesions at ultrasonography: feature analysis and BI-RADS assessment.
Ko KH; Hsu HH; Yu JC; Peng YJ; Tung HJ; Chu CM; Chang TH; Chang WC; Wu YC; Lin YP; Hsu GC
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jan; 84(1):77-85. PubMed ID: 25455412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [The value of ultrasound classification in BI-RADS category 4 of breast complex cystic masses].
Yao JP; Niu LJ; Wang Y; Geng CY; Chang Q; Chen Y; Zhu L
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2018 Sep; 40(9):672-675. PubMed ID: 30293391
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Nonpalpable BI-RADS 4 breast lesions: sonographic findings and pathology correlation.
Elverici E; Barça AN; Aktaş H; Özsoy A; Zengin B; Çavuşoğlu M; Araz L
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2015; 21(3):189-94. PubMed ID: 25835079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Ultrasonographic alterations associated with the dilatation of mammary ducts: feature analysis and BI-RADS assessment.
Hsu HH; Yu JC; Hsu GC; Chang WC; Yu CP; Tung HJ; Tzao C; Huang GS
Eur Radiol; 2010 Feb; 20(2):293-302. PubMed ID: 19707771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by ultrasonographically guided core needle biopsy.
Hsu HH; Yu JC; Hsu GC; Yu CP; Chang WC; Tung HJ; Lin WC; Tsai SH; Huang GS
Ultraschall Med; 2012 Oct; 33(5):447-54. PubMed ID: 22161618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Value of Ultrasonographic Features for Assessing Malignant Potential of Complex Cystic Breast Lesions.
Yao JP; Hao YZ; Chang Q; Geng CY; Chen Y; Zhao WP; Song Y; Zhou X
J Ultrasound Med; 2017 Apr; 36(4):699-704. PubMed ID: 28109002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Characterization of sonographically detected breast lesions using three-dimensional data sets].
Fischer T; Filimonow S; Hamm B; Slowinski T; Thomas A
Rofo; 2006 Dec; 178(12):1224-34. PubMed ID: 17136646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.
Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS
Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Benign papilloma without atypia diagnosed at US-guided 14-gauge core-needle biopsy: clinical and US features predictive of upgrade to malignancy.
Youk JH; Kim EK; Kwak JY; Son EJ; Park BW; Kim SI
Radiology; 2011 Jan; 258(1):81-8. PubMed ID: 20971773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mucocele-like tumors of the breast as cystic lesions: sonographic-pathologic correlation.
Kim SM; Kim HH; Kang DK; Shin HJ; Cho N; Park JM; Cha JH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jun; 196(6):1424-30. PubMed ID: 21606308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories.
Liberman L; Abramson AF; Squires FB; Glassman JR; Morris EA; Dershaw DD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Jul; 171(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 9648759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Influence of age on PPV of sonographic BI-RADS categories 3, 4, and 5.
Fu CY; Hsu HH; Yu JC; Hsu GC; Hsu KF; Chan DC; Ku CH; Lu TC; Chu CH
Ultraschall Med; 2011 Jan; 32 Suppl 1():S8-13. PubMed ID: 20603785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Mammographic characteristics and vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) of non-palpable breast lesions.
Ventrella V; Tufaro A; Zito FA; Addante M; Stea B; Dentamaro R; D'Amico C; Paradiso A
Acta Radiol; 2011 Jul; 52(6):602-7. PubMed ID: 21565889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Scoring system based on BI-RADS lexicon to predict probability of malignancy in suspicious microcalcifications.
Youk JH; Son EJ; Kim JA; Moon HJ; Kim MJ; Choi CH; Kim EK
Ann Surg Oncol; 2012 May; 19(5):1491-8. PubMed ID: 22173328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. BI-RADS for sonography: positive and negative predictive values of sonographic features.
Hong AS; Rosen EL; Soo MS; Baker JA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2005 Apr; 184(4):1260-5. PubMed ID: 15788607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Value of the US BI-RADS final assessment following mastectomy: BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions.
Gweon HM; Son EJ; Youk JH; Kim JA; Chung J
Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):255-60. PubMed ID: 22302210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Does power Doppler ultrasonography improve the BI-RADS category assessment and diagnostic accuracy of solid breast lesions?
Tozaki M; Fukuma E
Acta Radiol; 2011 Sep; 52(7):706-10. PubMed ID: 21596798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Imaging findings and accuracy of core needle biopsy in mucinous carcinoma of the breast.
Bode MK; Rissanen T
Acta Radiol; 2011 Mar; 52(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 21498339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Outcome of initially only magnetic resonance mammography-detected findings with and without correlate at second-look sonography: distribution according to patient history of breast cancer and lesion size.
Linda A; Zuiani C; Londero V; Bazzocchi M
Breast; 2008 Feb; 17(1):51-7. PubMed ID: 17709249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
