Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: Feasibility

Radiology

Volumn 229, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 261-268

  Lewin, John M ^a   Isaacs, Pamela K ^a   Vance, Virginia ^a   Larke, Fred J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Breast radiography, comparative studies; Breast radiography, technology

Indexed keywords

IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIUM; IODINE; IOHEXOL;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER INVASION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE SUBTRACTION; IMAGING SYSTEM; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0141629469     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2291021276     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Bird RE. Low-cost screening mammography: report on finances and review of 21,716 consecutive cases. Radiology 1989; 171:87-90.
2. Linver MN, Paster SB, Rosenberg RD, Key CR, Stidley CA, King WV. Improvement in mammography interpretation skills in a community radiology practice after dedicated teaching courses: 2-year medical audit of 38,633 cases. Radiology 1992; 184:39-43.
3. Baker LH. Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report. CA Cancer J Clin 1982; 32:194-225.
4. Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D'Orsi CJ, et al. Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology 2001; 218:873-880.
5. Ackerman LV, Watt AC, Shetty P, et al. Breast lesions examined by digital angiography. Work in progress. Radiology 1985; 155:65-68.
6. Chang CHJ, Nesbit DE, Fisher DR, et al. Computed tomographic mammography using a conventional body scanner. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1981; 138:553-558.
7. Muller JWT, Van Waes PFG, Koehler PR. Computed tomography of breast lesions: comparison with x-ray mammography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1983; 7:650-654.
8. Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Lucidarme O, et al. Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 191:625-631.
9. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG, et al. Breast MR imaging: interpretation model. Radiology 1997; 202:833-841.
10. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, et al. MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 1993; 187:493-501.
11. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1996; 200:639-649.
12. Boetes C, Strijk SP, Holland R, Barentsz JO, Van Der Sluis RF, Ruijs JH. False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:1231-1234.
13. Frouge C, Guinebretiere JM, Contesso G, Di Paola R, Blery M. Correlation between contrast enhancement in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast and tumor angiogenesis. Invest Radiol 1994; 29:1043-1049.
14. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:171-178.