165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27147454)
1. Prostate Cancer Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Imaging at 1.5 and 3.0 T: A Meta-Analysis.
Chen H; Sutedjo J; Wang L; Yin X
Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2016 Aug; 15(4):625-31. PubMed ID: 27147454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging in diagnosis of suspicious prostate cancer: A meta-analysis.
Cai W; Zhu D; Byanju S; Chen J; Zhang H; Wang Y; Liao M
Medicine (Baltimore); 2019 Apr; 98(14):e14891. PubMed ID: 30946315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Local staging of prostatic carcinoma: comparison of transrectal sonography and endorectal MR imaging.
Presti JC; Hricak H; Narayan PA; Shinohara K; White S; Carroll PR
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Jan; 166(1):103-8. PubMed ID: 8571856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Three Tesla Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Comparison of Performance with and without Endorectal Coil for Prostate Cancer Detection, PI-RADS™ version 2 Category and Staging with Whole Mount Histopathology Correlation.
Mirak SA; Shakeri S; Bajgiran AM; Felker ER; Sung KH; Asvadi NH; Khoshnoodi P; Markovic D; Ponzini D; Ahuja P; Sisk A; Reiter RE; Lu D; Raman SS
J Urol; 2019 Mar; 201(3):496-502. PubMed ID: 30273608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Proton two-dimensional chemical shift imaging for evaluation of prostate cancer: external surface coil vs. endorectal surface coil.
Kaji Y; Wada A; Imaoka I; Matsuo M; Terachi T; Kobashi Y; Sugimura K; Fujii M; Maruyama K; Takizawa O
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2002 Dec; 16(6):697-706. PubMed ID: 12451583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Prostate cancer: incremental value of endorectal MR imaging findings for prediction of extracapsular extension.
Wang L; Mullerad M; Chen HN; Eberhardt SC; Kattan MW; Scardino PT; Hricak H
Radiology; 2004 Jul; 232(1):133-9. PubMed ID: 15166321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Detection of recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: comparison of 11C-choline PET/CT with pelvic multiparametric MR imaging with endorectal coil.
Kitajima K; Murphy RC; Nathan MA; Froemming AT; Hagen CE; Takahashi N; Kawashima A
J Nucl Med; 2014 Feb; 55(2):223-32. PubMed ID: 24434294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Head-to-head comparison of prostate MRI using an endorectal coil versus a non-endorectal coil: meta-analysis of diagnostic performance in staging T3 prostate cancer.
Tirumani SH; Suh CH; Kim KW; Shinagare AB; Ramaiya NH; Fennessy FM
Clin Radiol; 2020 Feb; 75(2):157.e9-157.e19. PubMed ID: 31711637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Combined magnetic resonance spectroscopy and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging for prostate cancer detection.
Perdonà S; Di Lorenzo G; Autorino R; Buonerba C; De Sio M; Setola SV; Fusco R; Ronza FM; Caraglia M; Ferro M; Petrillo A
Urol Oncol; 2013 Aug; 31(6):761-5. PubMed ID: 21906966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prostate carcinoma: assessment of diagnostic criteria for capsular penetration on endorectal coil MR images.
Outwater EK; Petersen RO; Siegelman ES; Gomella LG; Chernesky CE; Mitchell DG
Radiology; 1994 Nov; 193(2):333-9. PubMed ID: 7972739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Bone Metastasis in Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Woo S; Suh CH; Kim SY; Cho JY; Kim SH
Eur Urol; 2018 Jan; 73(1):81-91. PubMed ID: 28412063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical comparison between a currently available single-loop and an investigational dual-channel endorectal receive coil for prostate magnetic resonance imaging: a feasibility study at 1.5 and 3 T.
Vos EK; Sambandamurthy S; Kamel M; McKenney R; van Uden MJ; Hoeks CM; Yakar D; Scheenen TW; Fütterer JJ
Invest Radiol; 2014 Jan; 49(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 24019020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Performance comparison of 1.5-T endorectal coil MRI with 3.0-T nonendorectal coil MRI in patients with prostate cancer.
Shah ZK; Elias SN; Abaza R; Zynger DL; DeRenne LA; Knopp MV; Guo B; Schurr R; Heymsfield SB; Jia G
Acad Radiol; 2015 Apr; 22(4):467-74. PubMed ID: 25579637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Accuracy of MR imaging for staging prostate cancer: a meta-analysis to examine the effect of technologic change.
Sonnad SS; Langlotz CP; Schwartz JS
Acad Radiol; 2001 Feb; 8(2):149-57. PubMed ID: 11227643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopy of human prostate at 3 T without endorectal coil: feasibility.
Scheenen TW; Heijmink SW; Roell SA; Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa CA; Knipscheer BC; Witjes JA; Barentsz JO; Heerschap A
Radiology; 2007 Nov; 245(2):507-16. PubMed ID: 17848681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Prostate cancer: detection of extracapsular extension by genitourinary and general body radiologists at MR imaging.
Mullerad M; Hricak H; Wang L; Chen HN; Kattan MW; Scardino PT
Radiology; 2004 Jul; 232(1):140-6. PubMed ID: 15166319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging for locally recurrent prostate cancer after external beam radiation therapy: preliminary experience.
Coakley FV; Teh HS; Qayyum A; Swanson MG; Lu Y; Roach M; Pickett B; Shinohara K; Vigneron DB; Kurhanewicz J
Radiology; 2004 Nov; 233(2):441-8. PubMed ID: 15375223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A meta-analysis of the accuracy of prostate cancer studies which use magnetic resonance spectroscopy as a diagnostic tool.
Wang P; Guo YM; Liu M; Qiang YQ; Guo XJ; Zhang YL; Duan XY; Zhang QJ; Liang W
Korean J Radiol; 2008; 9(5):432-8. PubMed ID: 18838853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T--comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance.
Heijmink SW; Fütterer JJ; Hambrock T; Takahashi S; Scheenen TW; Huisman HJ; Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa CA; Knipscheer BC; Kiemeney LA; Witjes JA; Barentsz JO
Radiology; 2007 Jul; 244(1):184-95. PubMed ID: 17495178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Magnetic resonance imaging on disease reclassification among active surveillance candidates with low-risk prostate cancer: a diagnostic meta-analysis.
Guo R; Cai L; Fan Y; Jin J; Zhou L; Zhang K
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2015 Sep; 18(3):221-8. PubMed ID: 25986915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
