Experimental characterization of a direct conversion amorphous selenium detector with thicker conversion layer for dual‐energy contrast‐enhanced breast imaging

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (8) ◽  
pp. 3965-3977 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Scaduto ◽  
Olivier Tousignant ◽  
Wei Zhao
2018 ◽  
Vol 211 (3) ◽  
pp. 571-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhavik N. Patel ◽  
Michael Rosenberg ◽  
Federica Vernuccio ◽  
Juan Carlos Ramirez-Giraldo ◽  
Rendon Nelson ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 87 (1041) ◽  
pp. 20140081 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Karunamuni ◽  
A Tsourkas ◽  
A D A Maidment

2016 ◽  
Vol 89 (1067) ◽  
pp. 20150609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalpana D Kariyappa ◽  
Francis Gnanaprakasam ◽  
Subhapradha Anand ◽  
Murali Krishnaswami ◽  
Madan Ramachandran

Radiology ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 274 (2) ◽  
pp. 445-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Achille Mileto ◽  
Rendon C. Nelson ◽  
Daniele Marin ◽  
Kingshuk Roy Choudhury ◽  
Lisa M. Ho

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (01) ◽  
pp. 026-035 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Albano ◽  
Carmelo Messina ◽  
Salvatore Gitto ◽  
Olympia Papakonstantinou ◽  
Luca Sconfienza

AbstractImaging has a pivotal role in the detection and characterization of spine bone tumors (SBTs), especially using magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and computed tomography (CT). Although MR performed with conventional pulse sequences has a robust reliability in the assessment of SBTs, some imaging features of benign lesions and malignancies overlap, making the differential diagnosis challenging. Several imaging tools are now available to perform a correct interpretation of images of SBTs including diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced MR, Dixon sequences, and dual-energy CT. Nevertheless, strengths and weaknesses of imaging modalities should be kept in mind, and it is crucial to be aware of the pitfalls that can be encountered in daily clinical practice when dealing with these lesions. This review provides an overview on the main challenges encountered when dealing with SBTs, providing some tricks of the trade to avoid possible diagnostic traps.


2021 ◽  
pp. 084653712110290
Author(s):  
Anat Kornecki

Objectives: The purpose of this article is to provide a detailed and updated review of the physics, techniques, indications, limitations, reporting, implementation and management of contrast enhanced mammography. Background: Contrast enhanced mammography (CEM), is an emerging iodine-based modified dual energy mammography technique. In addition to having the same advantages as standard full-field digital mammography (FFDM), CEM provides information regarding tumor enhancement, relying on tumor angiogenesis, similar to dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI). This article reviews current literature on CEM and highlights considerations that are critical to the successful use of this modality. Conclusion: Multiple studies point to the advantage of using CEM in the diagnostic setting of breast imaging, which approaches that of DCE-MRI.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document