Literature DB >> 20223907

Advances in mammographic imaging.

K J Robson1.   

Abstract

Breast imaging in the UK is currently undergoing a major change, with the widespread implementation of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) equipment. This article looks at some of the advanced imaging techniques that have become possible following the development of FFDM units. These techniques may prove to be useful additions to standard mammography for some groups of women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20223907      PMCID: PMC3473452          DOI: 10.1259/bjr/97865299

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  9 in total

1.  Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Sara C Chen; Ann-Katherine Carton; Michael Albert; Emily F Conant; Mitchell D Schnall; Andrew D A Maidment
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis--a feasibility study.

Authors:  A-K Carton; S C Gavenonis; J A Currivan; E F Conant; M D Schnall; A D A Maidment
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2009-06-08       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  An infinite number of laminagrams from a finite number of radiographs.

Authors:  E R Miller; E M McCurry; B Hruska
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1971-02       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Breast lesions: differential diagnosis using digital subtraction angiography.

Authors:  A C Watt; L V Ackerman; J P Windham; P C Shetty; M W Burke; M J Flynn; C Grodinsky; G Fine; S J Wilderman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of breast carcinoma using contrast-enhanced digital mammography.

Authors:  Clarisse Dromain; Corrine Balleyguier; Serge Muller; Marie-Christine Mathieu; France Rochard; Paule Opolon; Robert Sigal
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano; Constantine Gatsonis; Edward Hendrick; Martin Yaffe; Janet K Baum; Suddhasatta Acharyya; Emily F Conant; Laurie L Fajardo; Lawrence Bassett; Carl D'Orsi; Roberta Jong; Murray Rebner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience.

Authors:  Roberta A Jong; Martin J Yaffe; Mia Skarpathiotakis; Rene S Shumak; Nathalie M Danjoux; Anoma Gunesekara; Donald B Plewes
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-07-24       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility.

Authors:  John M Lewin; Pamela K Isaacs; Virginia Vance; Fred J Larke
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-07-29       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations.

Authors:  Thomas M Kolb; Jacob Lichy; Jeffrey H Newhouse
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 11.105

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.