149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32696213)
1. Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup.
Ullrich T; Kohli MD; Ohliger MA; Magudia K; Arora SS; Barrett T; Bittencourt LK; Margolis DJ; Schimmöller L; Turkbey B; Westphalen AC
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2020 Dec; 45(12):4260-4270. PubMed ID: 32696213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prostate MRI using a rigid two-channel phased-array endorectal coil: comparison with phased array coil acquisition at 3 T.
Lewis S; Ganti A; Argiriadi P; Rosen A; Hectors S; Semaan S; Song C; Peti S; Segall M; George K; Jaikaran V; Villa S; Kestenbaum D; Voutsinas N; Doucette J; Tewari A; Rastinehad AR; Taouli B
Cancer Imaging; 2022 Mar; 22(1):15. PubMed ID: 35296357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prostate MRI using an external phased array wearable pelvic coil at 3T: comparison with an endorectal coil.
O'Donohoe RL; Dunne RM; Kimbrell V; Tempany CM
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2019 Mar; 44(3):1062-1069. PubMed ID: 30324501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. T2- and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3T for the detection of prostate cancer with and without endorectal coil: An intraindividual comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance.
Baur AD; Daqqaq T; Wagner M; Maxeiner A; Huppertz A; Renz D; Hamm B; Fischer T; Durmus T
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Jun; 85(6):1075-84. PubMed ID: 27161055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A multitransmit external body array combined with a
Philips BWJ; van Uden MJ; Rietsch SHG; Orzada S; Scheenen TWJ
Med Phys; 2019 Sep; 46(9):3893-3905. PubMed ID: 31274201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. A Novel Three-Channel Endorectal Coil for Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3T.
Mo Z; Zhang X; Liang H; Chen Q; Tie C; Xiao W; Cao Q; Liu C; Zou C; Wan L; Zhang X; Li Y
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2023 Dec; 70(12):3381-3388. PubMed ID: 37318962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate at 3.0 T: comparison of endorectal coil (ERC) MRI and phased-array coil (PAC) MRI-The impact of SNR on ADC measurement.
Mazaheri Y; Vargas HA; Nyman G; Shukla-Dave A; Akin O; Hricak H
Eur J Radiol; 2013 Oct; 82(10):e515-20. PubMed ID: 23810189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Novel deep learning-based noise reduction technique for prostate magnetic resonance imaging.
Wang X; Ma J; Bhosale P; Ibarra Rovira JJ; Qayyum A; Sun J; Bayram E; Szklaruk J
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2021 Jul; 46(7):3378-3386. PubMed ID: 33580348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Development and evaluation of a multichannel endorectal RF coil for prostate MRI at 7T in combination with an external surface array.
Ertürk MA; Tian J; Van de Moortele PF; Adriany G; Metzger GJ
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2016 Jun; 43(6):1279-87. PubMed ID: 26584144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of an endorectal coil for 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the prostate at 3.0T in comparison to 1.5T: Do we need an endorectal coil?
Hoffner MK; Huebner F; Scholtz JE; Zangos S; Schulz B; Luboldt W; Vogl TJ; Bodelle B
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Aug; 85(8):1432-8. PubMed ID: 27423684
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Two-centre comparative experimental study of biparametric MRI at 3.0 T with and without endorectal coil using kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa) as a phantom for human prostate.
Murer S; Scheidler J; Mueller-Lisse UL; Helling M; Scherr M; Mueller-Lisse UG
Eur Radiol Exp; 2019 Aug; 3(1):30. PubMed ID: 31410699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Comparison of prostate cancer detection at 3-T MRI with and without an endorectal coil: A prospective, paired-patient study.
Costa DN; Yuan Q; Xi Y; Rofsky NM; Lenkinski RE; Lotan Y; Roehrborn CG; Francis F; Travalini D; Pedrosa I
Urol Oncol; 2016 Jun; 34(6):255.e7-255.e13. PubMed ID: 26971190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. MRI of the Prostate With and Without Endorectal Coil at 3 T: Correlation With Whole-Mount Histopathologic Gleason Score.
Dhatt R; Choy S; Co SJ; Ischia J; Kozlowski P; Harris AC; Jones EC; Black PC; Goldenberg SL; Chang SD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Jul; 215(1):133-141. PubMed ID: 32160050
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Monte Carlo-based noise compensation in coil intensity corrected endorectal MRI.
Lui D; Modhafar A; Haider MA; Wong A
BMC Med Imaging; 2015 Oct; 15():43. PubMed ID: 26459631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Doctor, a patient is on the phone asking about the endorectal coil!
Muglia VF; Vargas HA
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2020 Dec; 45(12):4003-4011. PubMed ID: 32300836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Small Field-of-view single-shot EPI-DWI of the prostate: Evaluation of spatially-tailored two-dimensional radiofrequency excitation pulses.
Attenberger UI; Rathmann N; Sertdemir M; Riffel P; Weidner A; Kannengiesser S; Morelli JN; Schoenberg SO; Hausmann D
Z Med Phys; 2016 Jun; 26(2):168-76. PubMed ID: 26300045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Physically implausible signals as a quantitative quality assessment metric in prostate diffusion-weighted MR imaging.
Szasz T; Lee G; Chatterjee A; Medved M; Devaraj A; Yousuf A; Fan X; Karczmar GS; Oto A
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2022 Jul; 47(7):2500-2508. PubMed ID: 35583823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
