Literature DB >> 24167184

Differences in breast density assessment using mammography, tomosynthesis and MRI and their implications for practice.

A Tagliafico1, G Tagliafico, N Houssami.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  2013        PMID： 24167184      PMCID： PMC3854572          DOI： 10.1259/bjr.20130528

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


× No keyword cloud information.
  31 in total

1.  A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification.

Authors:  Stefano Ciatto; Daniela Bernardi; Massimo Calabrese; Manuela Durando; Maria Adalgisa Gentilini; Giovanna Mariscotti; Francesco Monetti; Enrica Moriconi; Barbara Pesce; Antonella Roselli; Carmen Stevanin; Margherita Tapparelli; Nehmat Houssami
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 4.380

2.  Estimation of percentage breast tissue density: comparison between digital mammography (2D full field digital mammography) and digital breast tomosynthesis according to different BI-RADS categories.

Authors:  A S Tagliafico; G Tagliafico; F Cavagnetto; M Calabrese; N Houssami
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Constance D Lehman; Jeffrey D Blume; Paul Weatherall; David Thickman; Nola Hylton; Ellen Warner; Etta Pisano; Stuart J Schnitt; Constantine Gatsonis; Mitchell Schnall; Gia A DeAngelis; Paul Stomper; Eric L Rosen; Michael O'Loughlin; Steven Harms; David A Bluemke
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-05-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study.

Authors:  Stefano Ciatto; Nehmat Houssami; Daniela Bernardi; Francesca Caumo; Marco Pellegrini; Silvia Brunelli; Paola Tuttobene; Paola Bricolo; Carmine Fantò; Marvi Valentini; Stefania Montemezzi; Petra Macaskill
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 41.316

5.  Correlates of mammographic density in B-mode ultrasound and real time elastography.

Authors:  Sebastian Michael Jud; Lothar Häberle; Peter A Fasching; Katharina Heusinger; Carolin Hack; Florian Faschingbauer; Michael Uder; Thomas Wittenberg; Florian Wagner; Martina Meier-Meitinger; Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Matthias W Beckmann; Boris R Adamietz
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 2.497

6.  Water-fat separation with IDEAL gradient-echo imaging.

Authors:  Scott B Reeder; Charles A McKenzie; Angel R Pineda; Huanzhou Yu; Ann Shimakawa; Anja C Brau; Brian A Hargreaves; Garry E Gold; Jean H Brittain
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Mammographic density estimation: one-to-one comparison of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using fully automated software.

Authors:  Alberto Tagliafico; Giulio Tagliafico; Davide Astengo; Francesca Cavagnetto; Raffaella Rosasco; Giuseppe Rescinito; Francesco Monetti; Massimo Calabrese
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Breast percent density: estimation on digital mammograms and central tomosynthesis projections.

Authors:  Predrag R Bakic; Ann-Katherine Carton; Despina Kontos; Cuiping Zhang; Andrea B Troxel; Andrew D A Maidment
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Ultrasonographic assessment of breast density.

Authors:  Won Hwa Kim; Woo Kyung Moon; Seung Ja Kim; Ann Yi; Bo La Yun; Nariya Cho; Jung Min Chang; Hye Ryoung Koo; Mi Young Kim; Min Sun Bae; Su Hyun Lee; Jin You Kim; Eun Hee Lee
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 10.  Mammographic density. Potential mechanisms of breast cancer risk associated with mammographic density: hypotheses based on epidemiological evidence.

Authors:  Lisa J Martin; Norman F Boyd
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2008-01-09       Impact factor: 6.466
View more
  4 in total

1.  Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging.

Authors:  Said Pertuz; Elizabeth S McDonald; Susan P Weinstein; Emily F Conant; Despina Kontos
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Inter-observer agreement according to three methods of evaluating mammographic density and parenchymal pattern in a case control study: impact on relative risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Rikke Rass Winkel; My von Euler-Chelpin; Mads Nielsen; Pengfei Diao; Michael Bachmann Nielsen; Wei Yao Uldall; Ilse Vejborg
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2015-04-12       Impact factor: 4.430

3.  Breast density assessment using a 3T MRI system: comparison among different sequences.

Authors:  Alberto Tagliafico; Bianca Bignotti; Giulio Tagliafico; Davide Astengo; Lucia Martino; Sonia Airaldi; Alessio Signori; Maria Pia Sormani; Nehmat Houssami; Massimo Calabrese
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-03       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Mammographic density and structural features can individually and jointly contribute to breast cancer risk assessment in mammography screening: a case-control study.

Authors:  Rikke Rass Winkel; My von Euler-Chelpin; Mads Nielsen; Kersten Petersen; Martin Lillholm; Michael Bachmann Nielsen; Elsebeth Lynge; Wei Yao Uldall; Ilse Vejborg
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 4.430
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.