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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22739209)

  • 21. Comparison of combined x-ray radiography and magnetic resonance (XMR) imaging-versus computed tomography-based dosimetry for the evaluation of permanent prostate brachytherapy implants.
    Acher P; Rhode K; Morris S; Gaya A; Miquel M; Popert R; Tham I; Nichol J; McLeish K; Deehan C; Dasgupta P; Beaney R; Keevil SF
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2008 Aug; 71(5):1518-25. PubMed ID: 18513881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Ultrasound-CT fusion compared with MR-CT fusion for postimplant dosimetry in permanent prostate brachytherapy.
    Bowes D; Crook JM; Araujo C; Batchelar D
    Brachytherapy; 2013; 12(1):38-43. PubMed ID: 22727473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Segmenting the prostate and rectum in CT imagery using anatomical constraints.
    Chen S; Lovelock DM; Radke RJ
    Med Image Anal; 2011 Feb; 15(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 20634121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Prostate segmentation in MR images using discriminant boundary features.
    Yang M; Li X; Turkbey B; Choyke PL; Yan P
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2013 Feb; 60(2):479-88. PubMed ID: 23192474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of prostate volume, shape, and contouring variability determined from preimplant magnetic resonance and transrectal ultrasound images.
    Liu D; Usmani N; Ghosh S; Kamal W; Pedersen J; Pervez N; Yee D; Danielson B; Murtha A; Amanie J; Sloboda RS
    Brachytherapy; 2012; 11(4):284-91. PubMed ID: 22197014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A feature-based learning framework for accurate prostate localization in CT images.
    Liao S; Shen D
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2012 Aug; 21(8):3546-59. PubMed ID: 22510948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Imaging prostate cancer.
    Jung AJ; Westphalen AC
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2012 Nov; 50(6):1043-59. PubMed ID: 23122037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Prostate cancer imaging.
    Fuchsjäger M; Shukla-Dave A; Akin O; Barentsz J; Hricak H
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Feb; 49(1):107-20. PubMed ID: 18210320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Kidney segmentation in ultrasound, magnetic resonance and computed tomography images: A systematic review.
    Torres HR; Queirós S; Morais P; Oliveira B; Fonseca JC; Vilaça JL
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2018 Apr; 157():49-67. PubMed ID: 29477435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Prostate segmentation based on variant scale patch and local independent projection.
    Wu Y; Liu G; Huang M; Guo J; Jiang J; Yang W; Chen W; Feng Q
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2014 Jun; 33(6):1290-303. PubMed ID: 24893258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Fisher-Tippett region-merging approach to transrectal ultrasound prostate lesion segmentation.
    Wong A; Scharcanski J
    IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed; 2011 Nov; 15(6):900-7. PubMed ID: 21824854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparison of CT and MR-CT fusion for prostate post-implant dosimetry.
    Maletz KL; Ennis RD; Ostenson J; Pevsner A; Kagen A; Wernick I
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2012 Apr; 82(5):1912-7. PubMed ID: 21550183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Segmentation of prostate boundaries from ultrasound images using statistical shape model.
    Shen D; Zhan Y; Davatzikos C
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2003 Apr; 22(4):539-51. PubMed ID: 12774900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Patient specific prostate segmentation in 3-d magnetic resonance images.
    Chandra SS; Dowling JA; Shen KK; Raniga P; Pluim JP; Greer PB; Salvado O; Fripp J
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2012 Oct; 31(10):1955-64. PubMed ID: 22875243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Method of the connection HMRS and TRUS images--improvement of effectiveness transrectal core biopsy of the prostate].
    Lipczyński W
    Przegl Lek; 2012; 69(5):176-80. PubMed ID: 23050412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Automatic shape-based level set segmentation for needle tracking in 3-D TRUS-guided prostate brachytherapy.
    Yan P; Cheeseborough JC; Chao KS
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2012 Sep; 38(9):1626-36. PubMed ID: 22763006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Prostate volumetric assessment by magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound: impact of variation in calculated prostate-specific antigen density on patient eligibility for active surveillance program.
    Dianat SS; Rancier Ruiz RM; Bonekamp D; Carter HB; Macura KJ
    J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2013; 37(4):589-95. PubMed ID: 23863537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. Imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis: present role and future perspectives.
    Pinto F; Totaro A; Calarco A; Sacco E; Volpe A; Racioppi M; D'Addessi A; Gulino G; Bassi P
    Urol Int; 2011; 86(4):373-82. PubMed ID: 21372554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.