SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, Harms S, Leach MO, Lehman CD, Morris E, Pisano E, Schnall M, Sener S, Smith RA, Warner E, Yaffe M, Andrews KS, Russell CA, American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory Group. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 2007; 57: 7589.
  • 2
    Katipamula R, Degnim AC, Hoskin T, Boughey JC, Loprinzi C, Grant CS, Brandt KR, Pruthi S, Chute CG, Olson JE, Couch FJ, Ingle JN, Goetz MP. Trends in mastectomy rates at the Mayo Clinic Rochester: effect of surgical year and preoperative MRI. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 40824088.
  • 3
    Dinan MA, Curtis LH, Hammill BG, Patz EF, Jr, Abernethy AP, Shea AM, Schulman KA. Changes in the use and costs of diagnostic imaging among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer 1999–2006. JAMA 2010; 303: 16251631.
  • 4
    Bassett LW, Dhaliwal SG, Eradat J, Khan O, Farria DF, Brenner RJ, Sayre JW. National trends and practices in breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191: 332339.
  • 5
    Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, Ioffe OB. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004; 233: 830849.
  • 6
    Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Viehweg P, Heinig A, Küchler C. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur J Radiol 1997; 24: 94108.
  • 7
    Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Bick U, Bradley WG, Boné B, Casselman J, Coulthard A, Fischer U, Müller-Schimpfle M, Oellinger H, Patt R, Teubner J, Friedrich M, Newstead G, Holland R, Schauer A, Sickles EA, Tabar L, Waisman J, Wernecke KD. International investigation of breast MRI: results of a multicentre study (11 sites) concerning diagnostic parameters for contrast-enhanced MRI based on 519 histopathologically correlated lesions. Eur Radiol 2001; 11: 531546.
  • 8
    Jansen SA, Shimauchi A, Zak L, Fan X, Wood AM, Karczmar GS, Newstead GM. Kinetic curves of malignant lesions are not consistent across MRI systems: need for improved standardization of breast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI acquisition. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193: 832839.
  • 9
    Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kinkel K, Hochman MG, Kuhl CK, Kaiser WA, Weinreb JC, Smazal SF, Degani H, Viehweg P, Barclay J, Schnall MD. Development, standardization, and testing of a lexicon for reporting contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging studies. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13: 889895.
  • 10
    American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) MRI, 1st ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.
  • 11
    Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C. Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 13071318.
  • 12
    Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 2001; 220: 1330.
  • 13
    Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 2007; 244: 356378.
  • 14
    Moon M, Cornfeld D, Weinreb J. Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2009; 17: 351362.
  • 15
    Chatterji M, Mercado CL, Moy L. Optimizing 1.5-Tesla and 3-Tesla dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breasts. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2010; 18: 207224.
  • 16
    Brown J, Buckley D, Coulthard A, Dixon AK, Dixon JM, Easton DF, Eeles RA, Evans DGR, Gilbert FG, Graves M, Hayes C, Jenkins JPR, Jones AP, Keevil SF, Leach MO, Liney GP, Moss SM, Padhani AR, Parker GJM, Pointon LJ, Ponder BAJ, Redpath TW, Sloane JP, Turnbull LW, Walker LG, Warren RML. Magnetic resonance imaging screening in women at genetic risk of breast cancer: imaging and analysis protocol for the UK multicentre study. Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 18: 765776.
  • 17
    Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P, Thickman D, Hylton N, Warner E, Pisano E, Schnitt SJ, Gatsonis C, Schnall M, DeAngelis GA, Stomper P, Rosen EL, O'Loughlin M, Harms S, Bluemke DA, International Breast MRI Consortium Working Group. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2005; 103: 18981905.
  • 18
    Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, Causer PA, Zubovits JT, Jong RA, Cutrara MR, DeBoer G, Yaffe MJ, Messner SJ, Meschino WS, Piron CA, Naron SA. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 2004; 292: 13171325.
  • 19
    Sardanelli F, Podo F, D'Agnolo G, Verdecchia A, Santaquilani M, Musumeci R, Trecate G, Manoukian S, Morassut S, de Giacomi C, Federico M, Cortesi L, Corcione S, Cirillo S, Marra V. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 2007; 242: 698715.
  • 20
    El Khouli RH, Macura KJ, Barker PB, Habba MR, Jacobs MA, Bluemke DA. The relationship of temporal resolution to diagnostic performance for dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE) MRI of the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 30: 9991004.
  • 21
    Schorn C, Fischer U, Luftner-Nagel S, Grabbe E. Diagnostic potential of ultrafast contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast in hypervascularized lesions: are there advantages in comparison with standard dynamic MRI? J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23: 118122.
  • 22
    Kuhl CK, Schild HH, Morakkabati N. Dynamic bilateral contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: trade-off between spatial and temporal resolution. Radiology 2005; 236: 789800.
  • 23
    Barrett HH, Myers KJ. Statistical decision theory. In: Saleh BEA, editor. Foundations of image science. Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience; 2004. pp 801848.
  • 24
    Gudbjartsson H, Patz S. The Rician distribution of noisy MRI data. Magn Reson Imaging 1995; 34: 910914.
  • 25
    Fan X, Medved M, Karczmar GS, Yang C, Foxley S, Arkani S, Recant W, Zamora MA, Abe H, Newstead GM. Diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions using an empirical mathematical model for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25: 593603.
  • 26
    Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM, Jr, Boone JM. Magnetic resonance imaging. In: The essential physics of medical imaging. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2002. p 438.
  • 27
    Bernstein MA, King KF, Zhou XJ. Basic pulse sequences. In: Handbook of MRI pulse sequences. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2004. pp 579647.
  • 28
    Schabel MC, Parker DL. Uncertainty and bias in contrast concentration measurements using spoiled gradient echo pulse sequences. Phys Med Biol 2008; 53: 23452373.
  • 29
    Haacke EM, Brown RW, Thompson MR, Venkatesan R. Magnetic resonance imaging: physical principles and sequence design. New York: Wiley-Liss; 1999.
  • 30
    Tofts PS, Shuter B, Pope JM. Ni–DTPA doped agarose gel — a phantom material for Gd–DTPA enhancement measurements. Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 11: 125133.
  • 31
    Freed M, de Zwart JA, Loud JT, El Khouli RH, Myers KJ, Greene MH, Duyn JH, Badano A. An anthropomorphic phantom for quantitative evaluation of breast MRI. Med Phys 2011; 38: 743753.
  • 32
    Loud JT, Thiébaut AC, Abati AD, Filie AC, Nichols K, Danforth D, Giusti R, Prindiville SA, Greene MH. Ductal lavage in women from BRCA1/2 families: is there a future for ductal lavage in women at increased genetic risk of breast cancer? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009; 18: 12431251.
  • 33
    Bottomley PA, Hardy CJ, Argersinger RE, Allen-Moore G. A review of 1H nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation in pathology: are T1 and T2 diagnostic? Med Phys 1987; 14: 137.
  • 34
    Freed M, de Zwart JA, Hariharan P, Myers MR, Badano A. Development and characterization of a dynamic lesion phantom for the quantitative evaluation of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Med Phys 2011; 38: 56015611.