1.
Parris T.
Wakefield D,
Frimmer H. Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Connecticut Bill 458.
Breast J.
2013 Jan-Feb;19(1):64-70.
2.
Weigert JM.
The Connecticut Experiment; The Third Installment: 4 Years of Screening Women with Dense Breasts with Bilateral Ultrasound. Breast J.
2017 Jan;23(1):34-39.
3.
Kolb TM,
Lichy J,
Newhouse JH.
Comparison of the performance of screening mammography,
physical examination,
and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations.
Radiology.
2002;225:165–175
4.
Berg WA,
Blume JD,
Cromack JB,
Mendelson EB.
Operator depedence of physician-performed whole-breast US: lesion detection and characterization.
Raiology.
2006 Nov;241(2):355-65.
5.
Youk JH,
Gweon HM,
Son EJ.
Shear-wave elastography in breast ultrasonography: the state of the art.
Ultrasonography 2017;36(4)300-309
6.
Berg WA,
Cosgrove DO,
Dore CJ,
Schafer FK,
Svensson WE,
Hooley RJ,
et al.
Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses.
Radiology 2012;262:435–449. 2. Piccoli CW,
Forsberg F.
Advanced ultrasound techniques for breast imaging.
Semin Roentgenol 2011;46:60–67.
7.
Au FW et al.
Diagnostic Performance of Quantitative Shear Wave Elastophgraphy in the Evaluation of Solid Breast Masses: Determination of the Most Discriminatory Parameter. American Journal of Roentgenology 2014 203:3,
W328-W336
8.
Blank MAB,
et al.
Breast Lesion Elastography Region of Interest Selection and Quantitative Heterogeneity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Anaylsis.
Ultrasound Med Biol.
2017
9.
Youk JH,
Son EJ,
Gweon HM,
Kim H,
Park YJ,
Kim JA.
Comparison of strain and shear wave elastography for the differentiation of benign from malignant breast lesions,
combined with B-mode ultrasonography: qualitative and quantitative assessments.
Ultrasound Med Biol 2014;40:2336–2344.
10. Athanasiou A,
Tardivon A,
Tanter M,
Sigal-Zafrani B,
Bercoff J,
Deffieux T,
et al.
Breast lesions: quantitative elastography with supersonic shear imaging: preliminary results.
Radiology 2010;256:297–303.
11. Skerl K,
Vinnicombe S,
Giannotti E,
Thomson K,
Evans A.
Influence of region of interest size and ultrasound lesion size on the performance of 2D shear wave elastography (SWE) in solid breast masses.
Clin Radiol 2015;70:1421–1427.
12. Evans A,
Whelehan P,
Thomson K,
McLean D,
Brauer K,
Purdie C,
et al.
Quantitative shear wave ultrasound elastography: initial experience in solid breast masses.
Breast Cancer Res 2010;12:R104.
13. Chang JM,
Moon WK,
Cho N,
Yi A,
Koo HR,
Han W,
et al.
Clinical application of shear wave elastography (SWE) in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases.
Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011;129:89–97.
14.
Gweon HM,
Youk JH,
Kim JA.
Visually assessed colour overlay features in shear-wave elastography for breast masses: quantification and diagnostic performance
15. Tanter M,
Bercoff J,
Athanasiou A et al (2008) Quantitative assessment of breast lesion viscoelasticity: initial clinical results using supersonic shear imaging.
Ultrasound Med Biol 34:1373–1386
16.Tozaki M,
Fukuma E (2011) Pattern classification of ShearWave Elastography images for differential diagnosis between benign and malignant solid breast masses.
Acta Radiol 52:1069–1075
17.
Barr RG (2012) Sonographic breast elastography: a primer.
J Ultrasound Med 31:773–783