92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33418382)
21. PI-RADS v2 and periprostatic fat measured on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging can predict upgrading in radical prostatectomy pathology amongst patients with biopsy Gleason score 3 + 3 prostate cancer.
Zhai L; Fan Y; Sun S; Wang H; Meng Y; Hu S; Wang X; Yu W; Jin J
Scand J Urol; 2018; 52(5-6):333-339. PubMed ID: 30895901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Not All Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies Are Equal: The Impact of the Type of Approach and Operator Expertise on the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.
Stabile A; Dell'Oglio P; Gandaglia G; Fossati N; Brembilla G; Cristel G; Dehò F; Scattoni V; Maga T; Losa A; Gaboardi F; Cardone G; Esposito A; De Cobelli F; Del Maschio A; Montorsi F; Briganti A
Eur Urol Oncol; 2018 Jun; 1(2):120-128. PubMed ID: 31100235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Multiparametric Magnetic-Resonance to Confirm Eligibility to an Active Surveillance Program for Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: Intermediate Time Results of a Third Referral High Volume Centre Active Surveillance Protocol.
Luzzago S; Musi G; Catellani M; Russo A; Di Trapani E; Mistretta FA; Bianchi R; Cozzi G; Conti A; Pricolo P; Ferro M; Matei DV; Mirone V; Petralia G; de Cobelli O
Urol Int; 2018; 101(1):56-64. PubMed ID: 29734177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Lesion volume predicts prostate cancer risk and aggressiveness: validation of its value alone and matched with prostate imaging reporting and data system score.
Martorana E; Pirola GM; Scialpi M; Micali S; Iseppi A; Bonetti LR; Kaleci S; Torricelli P; Bianchi G
BJU Int; 2017 Jul; 120(1):92-103. PubMed ID: 27608292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. PI-RADS Version 2 Category on 3 Tesla Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Predicts Oncologic Outcomes in Gleason 3 + 4 Prostate Cancer on Biopsy.
Faiena I; Salmasi A; Mendhiratta N; Markovic D; Ahuja P; Hsu W; Elashoff DA; Raman SS; Reiter RE
J Urol; 2019 Jan; 201(1):91-97. PubMed ID: 30142318
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. In-bore 3.0-T Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided Transrectal Targeted Prostate Biopsy in a Repeat Biopsy Population: Diagnostic Performance, Complications, and Learning Curve.
Friedl A; Schneeweiss J; Sevcenco S; Eredics K; Kunit T; Susani M; Kivaranovic D; Eisenhuber-Stadler E; Lusuardi L; Brössner C; Schima W
Urology; 2018 Apr; 114():139-146. PubMed ID: 29330001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The FUTURE Trial: A Multicenter Randomised Controlled Trial on Target Biopsy Techniques Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Patients with Prior Negative Biopsies.
Wegelin O; Exterkate L; van der Leest M; Kummer JA; Vreuls W; de Bruin PC; Bosch JLHR; Barentsz JO; Somford DM; van Melick HHE
Eur Urol; 2019 Apr; 75(4):582-590. PubMed ID: 30522912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of biparametric and multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.
Xu L; Zhang G; Shi B; Liu Y; Zou T; Yan W; Xiao Y; Xue H; Feng F; Lei J; Jin Z; Sun H
Cancer Imaging; 2019 Dec; 19(1):90. PubMed ID: 31864408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Evaluation of relationships between the final Gleason score, PI-RADS v2 score, ADC value, PSA level, and tumor diameter in patients that underwent radical prostatectomy due to prostate cancer.
Gündoğdu E; Emekli E; Kebapçı M
Radiol Med; 2020 Sep; 125(9):827-837. PubMed ID: 32266690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Prebiopsy biparametric MRI: differences of PI-RADS version 2 in patients with different PSA levels.
Choi MH; Lee YJ; Jung SE; Rha SE; Byun JY
Clin Radiol; 2018 Sep; 73(9):810-817. PubMed ID: 29895386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Initial experience of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion transperineal biopsy: Biopsy techniques and results for 75 patients.
Tae JH; Shim JS; Jin HJ; Yoon SG; No TI; Kim JY; Kang SH; Cheon J; Kang SG
Investig Clin Urol; 2018 Nov; 59(6):363-370. PubMed ID: 30402568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. [The clinical decision-making value of prostate specific antigen and its derived indicators in prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 3 lesions].
Yang S; Zhang YY; Zhao WL; Wei CG; Chen T; Li MJ; Tan SX; Shen JK
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Apr; 100(13):997-1001. PubMed ID: 32294856
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Is There Still a Need for Repeated Systematic Biopsies in Patients with Previous Negative Biopsies in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies of the Prostate?
Exterkate L; Wegelin O; Barentsz JO; van der Leest MG; Kummer JA; Vreuls W; de Bruin PC; Bosch JLHR; van Melick HHE; Somford DM
Eur Urol Oncol; 2020 Apr; 3(2):216-223. PubMed ID: 31239236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. [Effects of dynamic contrast enhancement on diffusion weighted imaging score of 3 in prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 of peripheral zone].
Wang W; Shao ZH; Huang XH; Xu Y; Feng X; Wang PJ
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Apr; 100(13):1002-1006. PubMed ID: 32294857
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Expected impact of MRI-related interreader variability on ProScreen prostate cancer screening trial: a pre-trial validation study.
Hietikko R; Kilpeläinen TP; Kenttämies A; Ronkainen J; Ijäs K; Lind K; Marjasuo S; Oksala J; Oksanen O; Saarinen T; Savolainen R; Taari K; Tammela TLJ; Mirtti T; Natunen K; Auvinen A; Rannikko A
Cancer Imaging; 2020 Oct; 20(1):72. PubMed ID: 33036660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Risk-stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging and prostate-specific antigen density may reduce unnecessary follow-up biopsy procedures in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer.
Alberts AR; Roobol MJ; Drost FH; van Leenders GJ; Bokhorst LP; Bangma CH; Schoots IG
BJU Int; 2017 Oct; 120(4):511-519. PubMed ID: 28267899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. The detection of significant prostate cancer is correlated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy.
Cash H; Maxeiner A; Stephan C; Fischer T; Durmus T; Holzmann J; Asbach P; Haas M; Hinz S; Neymeyer J; Miller K; Günzel K; Kempkensteffen C
World J Urol; 2016 Apr; 34(4):525-32. PubMed ID: 26293117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Comparison between target magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in-gantry and cognitively directed transperineal or transrectal-guided prostate biopsies for Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3-5 MRI lesions.
Yaxley AJ; Yaxley JW; Thangasamy IA; Ballard E; Pokorny MR
BJU Int; 2017 Nov; 120 Suppl 3():43-50. PubMed ID: 28749035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Performance of PI-RADS v2 assessment categories assigned prior to MR-US fusion biopsy in a new fusion biopsy program.
Trent GP; Ye N; Chopra J; Chen R; Wong-You-Cheong J; Naslund M; Siddiqui MM; Wnorowski A
Clin Imaging; 2020 Aug; 64():29-34. PubMed ID: 32220760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. The combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 (PI-RADS v2) and periprostatic fat thickness on multi-parametric MRI to predict the presence of prostate cancer.
Cao Y; Cao M; Chen Y; Yu W; Fan Y; Liu Q; Gao G; Zhao Z; Wang X; Jin J
Oncotarget; 2017 Jul; 8(27):44040-44049. PubMed ID: 28476042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
