Academic literature on the topic 'Томосинтез'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Томосинтез.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Томосинтез"
Deresh, N. V., and O. P. Sharmazanova. "ІНФОРМАТИВНІСТЬ ТА ЕФЕКТИВНІСТЬ ПРОМЕНЕВИХ МЕТОДІВ У ДІАГНОСТИЦІ СПОНДИЛІТІВ." Здобутки клінічної і експериментальної медицини, no. 1 (May 18, 2020): 216–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.11603/1811-2471.2020.v.i1.11106.
Full textMikushin, S. Yu, N. I. Rozhkova, V. I. Grishkevich, O. E. Jakobs, I. I. Burdina, S. B. Zapirova, M. L. Mazo, and S. P. Prokopenko. "ASSESSMENT OF DIAGNOSTIC EFFICIENCY OF DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS IN DIAGNOSTICS OF BREAST DISEASES." Russian Electronic Journal of Radiology 9, no. 3 (2019): 86–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.21569/2222-7415-2019-9-3-86-92.
Full textMorozov, S. P., A. V. Vladzimirsky, A. V. Basarboliev, V. I. Baryshov, and O. A. Agafonova. "Tomosynthesis for diagnosis of musculoskeletal injuries and diseases: a systematic review." Genij Ortopedii 26, no. 3 (September 2020): 432–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.18019/1028-4427-2020-26-3-432-441.
Full textBelotserkovtseva, L. D., N. V. Klimova, and Z. O. Sarsebaeva. "Potential of x-ray tomosynthesis in diagnosis of breast diseases under the assisted reproductive technologies programme." Voprosy ginekologii, akušerstva i perinatologii 16, no. 4 (2017): 13–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.20953/1726-1678-2017-4-13-16.
Full textSimonovskaya, H. Yu, O. V. Zaytseva, and N. A. Sholokhova. "OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOLVING RELEVANT DIAGNOSTIC PROBLEMS IN PEDIATRICS WITH THE USE OF DIGITAL CHEST TOMOSYNTHESIS." Pediatria. Journal named after G.N. Speransky 99, no. 2 (April 13, 2020): 112–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.24110/0031-403x-2020-99-2-112-117.
Full textLoredo, Felipe Pereira de, Sabrina Ramos Bianco, Sildomar Queiroz e. Silva, and Daniella Paula Dias Coelho. "Сравнение томосинтеза и магнитно-резонансной томографии молочной железы для оценки реакции опухоли после неоадъювантной химиотерапии: клинический случай." Revista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento, July 28, 2021, 56–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.32749/nucleodoconhecimento.com.br/ru/113603.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Томосинтез"
Рыбальченко, Н. С., and О. Г. Аврунін. "Томосинтез при диагностике рака молочной железы." Thesis, Харьков: АНПРЭ, ХНУРЭ, Издательство «Точка», 2017. http://openarchive.nure.ua/handle/document/4086.
Full textNataša, Prvulović Bunović. "Дигитална мамографија и томосинтеза у детекцији и радиолошкој БИ РАДС категоризацији туморских лезија дојке." Phd thesis, Univerzitet u Novom Sadu, Medicinski fakultet u Novom Sadu, 2015. http://www.cris.uns.ac.rs/record.jsf?recordId=92756&source=NDLTD&language=en.
Full textCilj ove studije je da se uporedi dijagnostička značajnost 2D i 2D+3D mamografije u detektovanju tumora dojke. Ispitivali smo 864 dojki u 740 pacijentkinja. Studija je sprovedena u toku rutinskog rada u Centru za imidžing dijagnostiku Institutu za onkologiju Vojvodine. 2D + 3D mamografija su načinjene pojedinačno ili u istom aktu snimanja kao kombo opcija na Selenia Dimensions aparatu proizvođača firme Holodžik. Radiološki izvešataji su klasifikovani u kategorije 1-5 prema ACR BI RADS-u. Patohistološka verifikacija je vršena u svih suspektnih promena ili u toku njihovog praćenja . Sve pacijentkinje sa urednim nalazom ili mamografski uočenih benignih promena su radiološki praćene najkraće tokom 2 godine. Uočeno je 103 maligne lezije u dojkama klasifikovanih kao BI RADS 4, 5 na digitalnoj mamografiji i u 22 dojke čije su promene klasifikovane kao BI RADS 1-3, tokom praćenja ili pregleda dojki pomoću drugih modaliteta. Na 2D + 3D mamografiji malignite je potvrđen u 125 dojke od kojih je 118 klasifikovano kao BI RADS 4,5 i u 7 dojki čuje su promene kategorisane u BIRADS 1-3. Postoji statistički značajna razlika u distribuciji malignih nalaza u odnosu na podgrupe Studija je pokazala 20% lažno negativnih nalaza na 2D, a 5,6% na 2D + 3D modalitetu pregleda dojki. Osetljivost u otkrivanju raka u ovoj studiji iznosi 82,4% na 2D i 94,4% na 2D+3D metodi pregleda, dok je specifičnost 90,5% i 92,0%, respektivno. PPV je veća za 2D + 3D tehniku pregleda , iznosi 66,7%, kao i negativna prediktivna vrednost koja iznosi 99,0%. U 172 slučaja (19, 9%) nalazi 2D mamografije se ne uočavaju na 3D tehnici pregleda i smatraju se posledicom strukturne ili anatomske „buke“. Većina ne -stalnih nalaza (85%) je klasifikovano kao fokalna asimetrija. U ovoj studiji 500 dojki je klasifikovano prema ACR strukturi u masne (ACR 1) ili difuzne fibro-glandularne (ACR 2), a preostalih 264 je bilo heterodenzno (ACR 3) i značajno denzno (ACR 4). Statistički značajna razlika nije pokazana prilikom distribucije malignih nalaza u poređenju sa podgrupama dojki načinjenim prema njihovoj gustini - skladu sa pravilima ACR-a. Ukupna tačnost testa iznosi 89,4% za 2D i 92,4% za 2D + 3D mamografiju. Prediktivne vrednosti dobijene za 2D + 3D mamografiju su bolje od onih koje se odnose samo na 2D mamografiju, što je rezultat njene veće osetljivosti i šire mogućnosti karakterizacije promena. Varijabilnost u interpretaciji nalaza među dva radiologa je je niska, pokazano je slaganje u interšpretavciji evaluiranih mamograma u 94.1% slučajeva.
The aim of this study was to compare diagnostic importance of 2D and 2D+3D diagnostic mammography in breast tumor detection. We evaluated 864 breasts in 740 patients. Study was performed in Diagnostic Imaging Center at Oncology Institute of Vojvodina. 2D+3D mammography were performed during single procedure or via combo option at Selenia Dimensions unit, Hologic, BE. Radiological findings were classified in categories 1-5 according to ACR BIRADS. Pathohistologic verification was obtained in all suspicious findings or after follow up studies. All other patients with mammographic normal findings or benign findings were fallowed up during 2 years period or longer. We detected malignant lesions in 103 breasts classified as BIRADS 4,5 at digital mammography, and in 22 breasts classified as BIRADS 1-3 after followed up or diagnosed by other imaging modalities. At 2D+3D mammography malignancy was confirmed in 125 breasts, 118 classified as BIRADS 4,5 and in 7 breasts classified as BIRADS 1-3. There is statistically significant difference (p<0.001) in distribution of malignant findings compared to the subgroups classified according to 2D mammography. There was 20% false negative findings on 2D, and 5.6% on 2D+3D modality. Sensitivity in cancer detection in this study is 82.4% and 94.4% for 2D and 2D+3D mammography, while specificity is 90.5% and 92.0%, respectively. PPV is higher for 2D+3D technique (66.7%), as well as negative predictive value (99.0%). In 172 cases (19, 9%) 2D mammography findings did not persist on 3D mammography and were considered as structural or anatomical noise. The majority of the non-persistent findings (85%) were classified as asymmetric focal density. In this study 500 breast were classified according to ACR as fatty (ACR 1) or scattered fibroglandular densities (ACR 2), and the remaining 264 had heterogeneously (ACR 3) and extremely dense breasts (ACR 4). Statistically significant difference (p<0.001) was not shown in distribution of malignant findings compared to the subgroups of density structure according to ACR. Overall accuracy of the test was 89.4% and 92.4% for 2D and 2D+3D mammography, respectively. Predictive values obtained in 2D+ 3D mammography are better than those for 2D mammography alone, as a result of its higher sensitivity and better possibility of lesion characterization. Interobserver variability is low, there is an agreement between two radiologist between two radiologic interpretations in 94.1% cases.
Reports on the topic "Томосинтез"
ВОЗМОЖНОСТИ ЦИФРОВОГО ТОМОСИНТЕЗА В ДИАГНОСТИКЕ РАЗЛИЧНЫХ ФОРМ ТУБЕРКУЛЕЗА ЛЕГКИХ. LJournal, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.18411/a-2016-004.
Full text