Literature DB >> 24792660

Contrast-enhanced digital mammography.

Maxine Jochelson1.   

Abstract

Mammography is the only technology documented to reduce breast cancer mortality. Its sensitivity, however, is 75% to 80% at best and reduced to 30% to 50% in women with dense breasts. MR imaging is a sensitive modality for the detection of breast cancer but cannot be used in all patients. Its sensitivity is due in large part to its ability to detect enhancement of tumor vascularity so cancers can be detected before a mass is present. Contrast-enhanced dual-energy mammography uses the same capability of vascular enhancement and has been demonstrated to be more sensitive than routine mammography.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contrast; Digital mammography; MR imaging; Neovascularity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24792660     DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2013.12.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am        ISSN: 0033-8389            Impact factor:   2.303


  11 in total

1.  Development of silica-encapsulated silver nanoparticles as contrast agents intended for dual-energy mammography.

Authors:  Roshan Karunamuni; Pratap C Naha; Kristen C Lau; Ajlan Al-Zaki; Anatoliy V Popov; Edward J Delikatny; Andrew Tsourkas; David P Cormode; Andrew D A Maidment
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Radiomics Analysis for Noninvasive Breast Cancer Characterization: Initial Results.

Authors:  Maria Adele Marino; Katja Pinker; Doris Leithner; Janice Sung; Daly Avendano; Elizabeth A Morris; Maxine Jochelson
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Gold silver alloy nanoparticles (GSAN): an imaging probe for breast cancer screening with dual-energy mammography or computed tomography.

Authors:  Pratap C Naha; Kristen C Lau; Jessica C Hsu; Maryam Hajfathalian; Shaameen Mian; Peter Chhour; Lahari Uppuluri; Elizabeth S McDonald; Andrew D A Maidment; David P Cormode
Journal:  Nanoscale       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 7.790

4.  Comparison of Background Parenchymal Enhancement at Contrast-enhanced Spectral Mammography and Breast MR Imaging.

Authors:  Julie Sogani; Elizabeth A Morris; Jennifer B Kaplan; Donna D'Alessio; Debra Goldman; Chaya S Moskowitz; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  A Quantification Method for Breast Tissue Thickness and Iodine Concentration Using Photon-Counting Detector.

Authors:  Seokmin Han
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  The Clinical Utility of a Negative Result at Molecular Breast Imaging: Initial Proof of Concept.

Authors:  Ravi Jain; Deanna R Katz; Amber D Kapoor
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2020-09-25

7.  The quality of tumor size assessment by contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and the benefit of additional breast MRI.

Authors:  Marc B I Lobbes; Ulrich C Lalji; Patty J Nelemans; Ivo Houben; Marjolein L Smidt; Esther Heuts; Bart de Vries; Joachim E Wildberger; Regina G Beets-Tan
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2015-01-05       Impact factor: 4.207

8.  Removal of pectoral muscle based on topographic map and shape-shifting silhouette.

Authors:  Bushra Mughal; Nazeer Muhammad; Muhammad Sharif; Amjad Rehman; Tanzila Saba
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Radiomics for Tumor Characterization in Breast Cancer Patients: A Feasibility Study Comparing Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Maria Adele Marino; Doris Leithner; Janice Sung; Daly Avendano; Elizabeth A Morris; Katja Pinker; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-18

Review 10.  New diagnostic tools for breast cancer.

Authors:  Pascal A T Baltzer; Panagiotis Kapetas; Maria Adele Marino; Paola Clauser
Journal:  Memo       Date:  2017-06-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.