225 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28840280)
1. Comparison of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient parameters with prostate imaging reporting and data system V2 assessment for detection of clinically significant peripheral zone prostate cancer.
Hassanzadeh E; Alessandrino F; Olubiyi OI; Glazer DI; Mulkern RV; Fedorov A; Tempany CM; Fennessy FM
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2018 May; 43(5):1237-1244. PubMed ID: 28840280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Predictive role of PI-RADSv2 and ADC parameters in differentiating Gleason pattern 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 prostate cancer.
Alessandrino F; Taghipour M; Hassanzadeh E; Ziaei A; Vangel M; Fedorov A; Tempany CM; Fennessy FM
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2019 Jan; 44(1):279-285. PubMed ID: 30066169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging has limited added value over T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging when using PI-RADSv2 for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in patients with elevated PSA.
De Visschere P; Lumen N; Ost P; Decaestecker K; Pattyn E; Villeirs G
Clin Radiol; 2017 Jan; 72(1):23-32. PubMed ID: 27726850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Ratio Versus Conventional ADC for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer With 3-T MRI.
Bajgiran AM; Mirak SA; Sung K; Sisk AE; Reiter RE; Raman SS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2019 Sep; 213(3):W134-W142. PubMed ID: 31216201
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The performance of PI-RADSv2 and quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient for predicting confirmatory prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of prostate cancer.
Nougaret S; Robertson N; Golia Pernicka J; Molinari N; Hötker AM; Ehdaie B; Sala E; Hricak H; Vargas HA
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2017 Jul; 42(7):1968-1974. PubMed ID: 28258355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of the addition of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient data on the diagnostic performance of the PI-RADS v2 scoring system to detect clinically significant prostate cancer.
Moraes MO; Roman DHH; Copetti J; de S Santos F; Agra A; Noronha JAP; Carvalhal G; Neto EJD; Zanon M; Baldisserotto M; Hochhegger B
World J Urol; 2020 Apr; 38(4):981-991. PubMed ID: 31175458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System versions 1 and 2 for the Detection of Peripheral Zone Gleason Score 3 + 4 = 7 Cancers.
Krishna S; McInnes M; Lim C; Lim R; Hakim SW; Flood TA; Schieda N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Dec; 209(6):W365-W373. PubMed ID: 28981356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Diagnostic performance and reproducibility of T2w based and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) based PI-RADSv2 lexicon descriptors for prostate MRI.
Benndorf M; Hahn F; Krönig M; Jilg CA; Krauss T; Langer M; Dovi-Akué P
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Aug; 93():9-15. PubMed ID: 28668436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Multiparametric MRI in detection and staging of prostate cancer.
Boesen L
Dan Med J; 2017 Feb; 64(2):. PubMed ID: 28157066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Combined Analysis of Biparametric MRI and Prostate-Specific Antigen Density: Role in the Prebiopsy Diagnosis of Gleason Score 7 or Greater Prostate Cancer.
Lee SJ; Oh YT; Jung DC; Cho NH; Choi YD; Park SY
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Sep; 211(3):W166-W172. PubMed ID: 30016148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate: should we use quantitative metrics to better characterize focal lesions originating in the peripheral zone?
Pierre T; Cornud F; Colléter L; Beuvon F; Foissac F; Delongchamps NB; Legmann P
Eur Radiol; 2018 May; 28(5):2236-2245. PubMed ID: 29168004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Updated prostate imaging reporting and data system (PIRADS v2) recommendations for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using multiparametric MRI: critical evaluation using whole-mount pathology as standard of reference.
Vargas HA; Hötker AM; Goldman DA; Moskowitz CS; Gondo T; Matsumoto K; Ehdaie B; Woo S; Fine SW; Reuter VE; Sala E; Hricak H
Eur Radiol; 2016 Jun; 26(6):1606-12. PubMed ID: 26396111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Can Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values Assist PI-RADS Version 2 DWI Scoring? A Correlation Study Using the PI-RADSv2 and International Society of Urological Pathology Systems.
Gaur S; Harmon S; Rosenblum L; Greer MD; Mehralivand S; Coskun M; Merino MJ; Wood BJ; Shih JH; Pinto PA; Choyke PL; Turkbey B
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Jul; 211(1):W33-W41. PubMed ID: 29733695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of PI-RADS 2, ADC histogram-derived parameters, and their combination for the diagnosis of peripheral zone prostate cancer.
Lin WC; Westphalen AC; Silva GE; Chodraui Filho S; Reis RB; Muglia VF
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2016 Nov; 41(11):2209-2217. PubMed ID: 27364781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prospective comparison of PI-RADS version 2 and qualitative in-house categorization system in detection of prostate cancer.
Gaur S; Harmon S; Mehralivand S; Bednarova S; Calio BP; Sugano D; Sidana A; Merino MJ; Pinto PA; Wood BJ; Shih JH; Choyke PL; Turkbey B
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Nov; 48(5):1326-1335. PubMed ID: 29603833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of observation size and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in PI-RADS v2.1 assessment category 4 and 5 observations compared to adverse pathological outcomes.
Abreu-Gomez J; Walker D; Alotaibi T; McInnes MDF; Flood TA; Schieda N
Eur Radiol; 2020 Aug; 30(8):4251-4261. PubMed ID: 32211965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Role of PI-RADS Version 2 for Prediction of Upgrading in Biopsy-Proven Prostate Cancer With Gleason Score 6.
Song W; Bang SH; Jeon HG; Jeong BC; Seo SI; Jeon SS; Choi HY; Kim CK; Lee HM
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2018 Aug; 16(4):281-287. PubMed ID: 29550198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinically insignificant prostate cancer suitable for active surveillance according to Prostate Cancer Research International: Active surveillance criteria: Utility of PI-RADS v2.
Yim JH; Kim CK; Kim JH
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Apr; 47(4):1072-1079. PubMed ID: 28901655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. PI-RADS version 2: quantitative analysis aids reliable interpretation of diffusion-weighted imaging for prostate cancer.
Park SY; Shin SJ; Jung DC; Cho NH; Choi YD; Rha KH; Hong SJ; Oh YT
Eur Radiol; 2017 Jul; 27(7):2776-2783. PubMed ID: 27957637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Version 2, Assessment Categories and Pathologic Outcomes in Patients With Gleason Score 3 + 4 = 7 Prostate Cancer Diagnosed at Biopsy.
Lim CS; McInnes MDF; Flood TA; Breau RH; Morash C; Thornhill RE; Schieda N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 May; 208(5):1037-1044. PubMed ID: 28267359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
