ECR 2013 – Final Programme - myESR.org

Scientific Sessions15:03B-0946 Assessment of the variation in the contrast-to-noiseratio across a range of CT scanners in a multicentreperfusion CT study of colorectal cancer (PROSpeCT): aphantom studyM. Lewis, V.J. Goh; London/UK15:12B-0947 Diffusion-weighted-based MRI: volumetry andapparent diffusion coefficientS.F. Carbone, M. Palumbo, T. Carfagno, V. Ricci, L. Pirtoli, L. Volterrani; Siena/IT15:21B-0948 Computed tomography of the bowel: a prospectivecomparison study between four techniquesM. Revelli, F. Paparo, L. Bacigalupo, A. Garlaschi, L. Cevasco, E. Biscaldi,G. Rollandi; Genoa/IT14:00–15:30 Room F1BreastSS 1802a Newer techniques in breast imagingand therapyModerators: F. Chamming‘s; Paris/FR, M. Sklair-Levy; Tel Aviv/IL14:00B-0949 The impact of contrast-enhanced digitalmammography on the characterization of breastlesionsM.H. Helal, R.M.K. Fouad, M.A. Aly, R. Wessam, I. Gouda, N. AbdelShafi,O.M. Nada, S. Mansour, M. Elbadawy; Cairo/EG14:09B-0950 Clinical feasibility of contrast-enhanced dual-energymammography (CEDEM) with a tungsten (W)/titanium(Ti) anode/filter combination: a prototype reportT. Knogler 1 , R. Leithner 1 , M. Hörnig 2 , F. Semturs 1 , M. Waitzbauer 1 , G. Langs 1 ,P. Homolka 1 , K. Pinker-Domenig 1 , T.H. Helbich 1 ; 1 Vienna/AT, 2 Erlangen/DE14:18B-0951 Comparison of contrast-enhanced dual-energymammography (CEDEM) with contrast-enhancedmagnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) in breastlesions: a prototype reportT. Knogler 1 , R. Leithner 1 , M. Hörnig 2 , M. Waitzbauer 1 , F. Semturs 1 , G. Langs 1 ,P. Homolka 1 , K. Pinker-Domenig 1 , T.H. Helbich 1 ; 1 Vienna/AT, 2 Erlangen/DE14:27B-0952 Metabolic imaging of breast tumours with dedicatedbreast 18F-FDG PET-CT: comparison with contrastenhancedMRI at 3T (3T CE-MRI)H.F. Magometschnigg, T.H. Helbich, H. Bickel, G. Wengert, B. Brück, K. Pinker-Domenig; Vienna/AT14:36B-0953 High spatial and temporal resolution breast imagingat 7 Tesla goes clinicalK. Pinker-Domenig, P.A.T. Baltzer, T. Helbich, S. Gruber, W. Bogner, O. Zaric,L. Minarikova, H. Moosbauer, S. Trattnig; Vienna/AT14:45B-0954 Evaluation of T1/T2 ratios in a pilot study as apotential biomarker of biopsy: proven benignand malignant breast lesions in correlation withhistopathological disease stageM.A. Malikova, J.N. Tkacz, P.J. Slanetz, A. Aakil, C.-Y. Guo, H. Jara; Boston, MA/US14:54B-0955 Improved differentiation of breast tumours usingnovel imaging system based on co-registered optoacoustictomography and ultrasoundP. Otto 1 , K. Kist 1 , N.C. Dornbluth 1 , T. Stavros 1 , D. Herzog 1 , B. Clingman 1 ,J. Zalev 1 , P. Lavin 2 , A. Oraevsky 3 ; 1 San Antonio, TX/US, 2 Southborough, MA/US,3Houston, TX/US15:03B-0956 Breast lesion excision system (BLES) – innovativebreast biopsy technology: experience understerotactic guidance in small microcalcificationclustersS. Vigano‘, G.P. Scaperrotta, C. Ferranti, L. Suman, M. Marchesini, E. Capalbo,P. Panizza; Milan/IT15:12B-0957 Percutaneous breast lesion excision system (BLES):a new tool for complete closed excision of high risklesionsN.M. Abdel Razek; Cairo/EG15:21B-0958 Cryoablation as local therapy for patients with breastcancer bone metastases (BCBM)C. Pusceddu 1 , S. Pilleri 2 , G. Amucano 1 , L. Melis 1 , G. Meloni 2 ; 1 Cagliari/IT,2Sassari/IT14:00–15:30 Room F2BreastSS 1802b Maximising cancer detection in breastscreeningModerators: M. Álvarez-Benito; Córdoba/ES, E. Szabó; Szeged/HU14:00B-0959 Breast cancer prediction modelling based on commonmammographic findings in screeningJ. Timmers 1 , A.L.M. Verbeek 1 , R.M. Pijnappel 2 , J. in ‚t Hout 1 , M.J.M. Broeders 1 ,G.J. den Heeten 3 ; 1 Nijmegen/NL, 2 Utrecht/NL, 3 Amsterdam/NL14:09B-0960 Non-blinded versus blinded double reading ofscreening mammograms in the Netherlands: apopulation-based studyL.E.M. Duijm 1 , G.J. den Heeten 2 , J. Nederend 1 , M.J.M. Broeders 2 ; 1 Eindhoven/NL,2Nijmegen/NL14:18B-0961 Discrepant screening mammography assessments atdouble reading: impact of arbitration by a third readeron screening outcomeL.E.M. Duijm 1 , G.J. den Heeten 2 , J. Nederend 1 , M.J.M. Broeders 2 ; 1 Eindhoven/NL,2Nijmegen/NL14:27B-0962 First experiences with a self-test for Dutch breastscreening radiologists as a quality assurance toolJ. Timmers 1 , A. Verbeek 1 , R. Pijnappel 2 , M. Broeders 1 , G. den Heeten 3 ;1Nijmegen/NL, 2 Utrecht/NL, 3 Amsterdam/NL14:36B-0963 Transition from analogue to digital screeningmammography significantly increases the proportionof women referred twice for the same lesionL.E.M. Duijm, H. Wiersma; Eindhoven/NL14:45B-0964 Audits as part of quality assurance in the Dutch breastcancer screening programmeT.D. Geertse, R. Holland, C.G.C.M. van Landsveld-Verhoeven, J.M.H. Timmers,K.H. Schuur, R. Pijnappel, F. Jansen, M.J.M. Broeders, G.J. den Heeten;Nijmegen/NLB-0946 – B-0964Monday265