AP Femur Cont. & Lat Femur

Posted on Updated on


http://youtu.be/1H0-fcla4R4

http://youtu.be/1H0-fcla4R4

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “AP Femur Cont. & Lat Femur

    snow removal Valparaiso Indiana said:
    August 14, 2014 at 6:26 am

    Wow, great blog.Thanks Again. Really Cool.
    Commercial snow removal Valparaiso, Indiana

    snow removal Valparaiso Indiana said:
    August 12, 2014 at 8:04 am

    I am so grateful for your article post.Really looking forward to read more. Really Cool.
    snow removal Valparaiso IN

    wakeupnow business said:
    August 11, 2014 at 2:37 pm

    Great article. Cool.
    wakeupnow reviews

    communications said:
    August 11, 2014 at 8:59 am

    A big thank you for your blog post.Really thank you! Cool.
    lead generation

    computer store in columbia sc said:
    August 9, 2014 at 6:48 am

    Very neat article post.Really thank you! Keep writing.
    computer repair lexington sc

    clapham cleaning said:
    August 8, 2014 at 5:11 am

    Thanks-a-mundo for the blog.Really looking forward to read more. Really Great.
    clapham cleaning

    detox said:
    August 7, 2014 at 12:41 pm

    Wow, great blog. Really Cool.
    detox

    wireless interactive presentation said:
    August 7, 2014 at 6:23 am

    I really enjoy the blog.Really looking forward to read more. Awesome.
    wireless presentation system

    how do i get rid of spots said:
    August 6, 2014 at 3:22 am

    Awesome blog. Fantastic.
    how to get rid of spots

    organic traffic redirecting said:
    August 5, 2014 at 5:52 am

    Muchos Gracias for your article post.Really thank you! Fantastic.
    cpa redirecting

    chinese tutor said:
    August 4, 2014 at 1:44 pm

    I cannot thank you enough for the blog article.Thanks Again. Will read on…
    h1 chinese

    personal budget software said:
    August 4, 2014 at 2:31 am

    Thanks for the blog post.Really looking forward to read more.
    create a budget

    repliche rolex said:
    August 1, 2014 at 10:24 am

    Very good article.Much thanks again. Great.
    orologi rolex replica

    what is the best tablet said:
    July 30, 2014 at 4:32 pm

    Major thankies for the article. Cool.
    best tablets 2013

    Hiram Mihalkovic said:
    February 12, 2014 at 7:07 am

    I want to start a blog on myyearbook but i cant locate the box on my profile.. I have made sure i’ve checked the box to show my latest blog in the manage profile boxes section.. But it still wont show up.. Please help.. Is there any other way to star…

    Effect of Observing Change from Comparison Mammograms on Performance of Screening Mammography in a Large Community-based Population said:
    December 6, 2011 at 11:26 pm

    Abstract

    Purpose: To evaluate the effect of comparison mammograms on accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV1), and cancer detection rate (CDR) of screening mammography to determine the role played by identification of change on comparison mammograms.

    Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant and institutional review board–approved prospective study was performed with waiver of patient informed consent. A total of 1 157 980 screening mammograms obtained between 1994 and 2008 in 435 183 women aged at least 40 years were included. Radiologists recorded presence of comparison mammograms and change, if seen. Women were followed for 1 year to monitor cancer occurrence. Performance measurements were calculated for screening with comparison mammograms versus screening without comparison mammograms and for screening with comparison mammograms that showed a change versus screening with comparison mammograms that did not show a change while controlling for age, breast density, and data clustering.

    Results: Comparison mammograms were available in 93% of examinations. For screening with comparison mammograms versus screening without comparison mammograms, CDR per 1000 women was 3.7 versus 7.1; recall rate, 6.9% versus 14.9%; sensitivity, 78.9% versus 87.4%; specificity, 93.5% versus 85.7%; and PPV1, 5.4% versus 4.8%. For screening with comparison mammograms that showed a change versus screening with comparison mammograms that did not show a change, CDR per 1000 women was 25.4 versus 0.8; recall rate, 41.4% versus 2.0%; sensitivity, 96.6% versus 43.5%; specificity, 60.4% versus 98.1%; and PPV1, 6.0% versus 3.9%. Detected cancers with change were 21.1% ductal carcinoma in situ and 78.9% invasive carcinoma. Detected cancers with no change were 19.3% ductal carcinoma in situ and 80.7% invasive carcinoma.

    Conclusion: Performance is affected when change from comparison mammograms is noted. Without change, sensitivity is low and specificity is high. With change, sensitivity is high, with a high false-positive rate (low specificity). Further work is needed to appreciate changes that might indicate cancer and to identify changes that are likely not indicative of cancer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s