1 y was performed in women who had problematic nipple discharge.

2 identify both benign and malignant causes of nipple discharge.

3 ification of potential sources of pathologic nipple discharge.

4 enign versus malignant sources of pathologic nipple discharge.

5 ciated findings such as microcalcifications, nipple discharge, and interval change were evaluated.

6 g findings of the most common causes of male nipple discharge, both benign and malignant.

7 ears to have been therapeutic as well, since nipple discharge ceased after the procedure.

8 ced mammography (CEM) in cases of suspicious nipple discharge due to the high negative predictive val

9                       Data including type of nipple discharge, future biopsy, and pathology reports w

10 56 patients who underwent CDR for pathologic nipple discharge greater than 15 years previous were rev

11                           CDR for pathologic nipple discharge is an effective way to diagnose and tre

12                                         Male nipple discharge is uncommon and highly associated with

13 ersion or retraction (n = 4), and associated nipple discharge (n = 2).

14 nation to seek immediate medical advice for 'nipple discharge or bleeding' (screening-eligible: n = 9

15               Patients found with pathologic nipple discharge present a diagnostic dilemma to surgeon

16 nely used to evaluate women with spontaneous nipple discharge (SND), but definitive diagnosis is usua

17 ary 1992 and December 1998, 23 patients with nipple discharge underwent contrast material-enhanced MR

18                                              Nipple discharge was not present.

19                        No skin ulceration or nipple discharge was present.

20 fective way to diagnose and treat pathologic nipple discharge without missing underlying cancers.