These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
215 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18758216)
1. Comparison of prostate volume measured by transrectal ultrasonography and MRI with the actual prostate volume measured after radical prostatectomy. Jeong CW; Park HK; Hong SK; Byun SS; Lee HJ; Lee SE Urol Int; 2008; 81(2):179-85. PubMed ID: 18758216 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Transrectal ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging in the estimation of prostate volume as compared with radical prostatectomy specimens. Lee JS; Chung BH Urol Int; 2007; 78(4):323-7. PubMed ID: 17495490 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of prostate volume measured by transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging: is transrectal ultrasound suitable to determine which patients should undergo active surveillance? Weiss BE; Wein AJ; Malkowicz SB; Guzzo TJ Urol Oncol; 2013 Nov; 31(8):1436-40. PubMed ID: 22503576 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Determination of Prostate Volume: A Comparison of Contemporary Methods. Bezinque A; Moriarity A; Farrell C; Peabody H; Noyes SL; Lane BR Acad Radiol; 2018 Dec; 25(12):1582-1587. PubMed ID: 29609953 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Comparison of Imaging and Clinical Methods to Estimate Prostate Volume: A Single-Centre Retrospective Study. Massanova M; Robertson S; Barone B; Dutto L; Caputo VF; Bhatt JR; Ahmad I; Bada M; Obeidallah A; Crocetto F Urol Int; 2021; 105(9-10):804-810. PubMed ID: 34247169 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Prostate volume measurement by TRUS using heights obtained by transaxial and midsagittal scanning: comparison with specimen volume following radical prostatectomy. Park SB; Kim JK; Choi SH; Noh HN; Ji EK; Cho KS Korean J Radiol; 2000; 1(2):110-3. PubMed ID: 11752939 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessment of in vivo calculation with ultrasonography compared to physical sections in vitro: a stereological study of prostate volumes. Acer N; Sofikerim M; Ertekin T; Unur E; Çay M; Öztürk F Anat Sci Int; 2011 Jun; 86(2):78-85. PubMed ID: 20734181 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The accuracy of transrectal ultrasound prostate volume estimation: clinical correlations. Matthews GJ; Motta J; Fracehia JA J Clin Ultrasound; 1996; 24(9):501-5. PubMed ID: 8906481 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Prostate cancer volume estimations based on transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy in order to predict clinically significant prostate cancer. Konyalioglu E; Tarhan H; Cakmak O; Pala EE; Zorlu F Int Braz J Urol; 2015; 41(3):442-8. PubMed ID: 26200537 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Transrectal ultrasonography: why are estimates of prostate volume and dimension so inaccurate? Nathan MS; Seenivasagam K; Mei Q; Wickham JE; Miller RA Br J Urol; 1996 Mar; 77(3):401-7. PubMed ID: 8814846 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Accuracy of prostatic ultrasonography versus MRI in measuring prostate volume]. Hou JL; Ma WL; Dong X; Zhu XY; Zhang Q; Qiu XF; Zhuang JL; Huang HF; Guo HQ; Gan WD Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue; 2022 Oct; 28(10):896-900. PubMed ID: 37838956 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Accuracy of in-vivo assessment of prostatic volume by MRI and transrectal ultrasonography. Rahmouni A; Yang A; Tempany CM; Frenkel T; Epstein J; Walsh P; Leichner PK; Ricci C; Zerhouni E J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1992; 16(6):935-40. PubMed ID: 1385499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of prostate and transition zone volume measured by the ellipsoid and planimetric methods with transrectal ultrasonography before seed implantation of prostate cancer. Ikeda T; Shinohara K Int J Urol; 2008 Feb; 15(2):190-1. PubMed ID: 18269465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of digital rectal examination, transrectal ultrasonography, and multicoil magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of prostate cancer. Sanchez-Chapado M; Angulo JC; Ibarburen C; Aguado F; Ruiz A; Viaño J; García-Segura JM; Gonzalez-Esteban J; Rodriquez-Vallejo JM Eur Urol; 1997; 32(2):140-9. PubMed ID: 9286643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Localising prostate cancer: comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and 3D-MR spectroscopic imaging with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Goris Gbenou MC; Peltier A; Addla SK; Lemort M; Bollens R; Larsimont D; Roumeguère T; Schulman CC; van Velthoven R Urol Int; 2012; 88(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 22004874 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Prostate volume measured preoperatively predicts for organ-confined disease in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Bianco FJ; Mallah KN; Korets R; Hricak H; Scardino PT; Kattan MW Urology; 2007 Feb; 69(2):343-6. PubMed ID: 17320675 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of transrectal ultrasonography to evaluate pathologic prostate weight: correlation with various prostate size groups. Bienz M; Hueber PA; Al-Hathal N; McCormack M; Bhojani N; Trinh QD; Zorn KC Urology; 2014 Jul; 84(1):169-74. PubMed ID: 24976231 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]