Literature DB >> 12704027

Rationale for a trial of screening breast ultrasound: American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666.

Wendie A Berg1.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  2003        PMID： 12704027     DOI： 10.2214/ajr.180.5.1801225

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN： 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


× No keyword cloud information.
  28 in total

1.  Combination of digital mammography with semi-automated 3D breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Ajay Kapur; Paul L Carson; Jeffrey Eberhard; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Kai Thomenius; Murtuza Lokhandwalla; Donald Buckley; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Mark A Helvie; Rebecca C Booi; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Ramon Q Erkamp; Heang-Ping Chan; J Brian Fowlkes; Jerry A Thomas; Cynthia E Landberg
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2004-08

Review 2.  A review of breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Chandra M Sehgal; Susan P Weinstein; Peter H Arger; Emily F Conant
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.673

Review 3.  Incorporating new imaging models in breast cancer management.

Authors:  Denise H Reddy; Ellen B Mendelson
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2005-03

4.  Does patient age affect the PPV3 of ACR BI-RADS Ultrasound categories 4 and 5 in the diagnostic setting?

Authors:  Yue Hu; Yaping Yang; Ran Gu; Liang Jin; Shiyu Shen; Fengtao Liu; Hongli Wang; Jingsi Mei; Xiaofang Jiang; Qiang Liu; Fengxi Su
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Breast cancer screening in a resource poor country: Ultrasound versus mammography.

Authors:  Olubukola At Omidiji; Princess C Campbell; Nicholas K Irurhe; Omolola M Atalabi; Oluyemisi O Toyobo
Journal:  Ghana Med J       Date:  2017-03

6.  Computerized determination scheme for histological classification of breast mass using objective features corresponding to clinicians' subjective impressions on ultrasonographic images.

Authors:  Akiyoshi Hizukuri; Ryohei Nakayama; Yumi Kashikura; Haruhiko Takase; Hiroharu Kawanaka; Tomoko Ogawa; Shinji Tsuruoka
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Maxine S Jochelson; D David Dershaw; Janice S Sung; Alexandra S Heerdt; Cynthia Thornton; Chaya S Moskowitz; Jessica Ferrara; Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-12-06       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Clinical utility of dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast microcalcifications without associated mass: a preliminary analysis.

Authors:  Yun-Chung Cheung; Hsiu-Pei Tsai; Yung-Feng Lo; Shir-Hwa Ueng; Pei-Chin Huang; Shin-Chih Chen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-07-10       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Supplementary screening sonography in mammographically dense breast: pros and cons.

Authors:  Ji Hyun Youk; Eun-Kyung Kim
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 10.  Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue. A systematic review.

Authors:  Monika Nothacker; Volker Duda; Markus Hahn; Mathias Warm; Friedrich Degenhardt; Helmut Madjar; Susanne Weinbrenner; Ute-Susann Albert
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-09-20       Impact factor: 4.430
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.