389 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33723287)
1. Analysis of risk factors for determining the need for prostate biopsy in patients with negative MRI.
Liang L; Qi F; Cheng Y; Zhang L; Cao D; Cheng G; Hua L
Sci Rep; 2021 Mar; 11(1):6048. PubMed ID: 33723287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection After a Negative Prebiopsy MRI Examination: Comparison of Biparametric Versus Multiparametric MRI.
Gan JM; Kikano EG; Smith DA; Rao S; Podury R; Wang M; Durieux JC; Paspulati RM; Ponsky L; Ramaiya NH; Tirumani SH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 May; 218(5):859-866. PubMed ID: 34817189
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined with Prostate-specific Antigen Density in Detecting and Ruling out Gleason 7-10 Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-naïve Men.
Boesen L; Nørgaard N; Løgager V; Balslev I; Bisbjerg R; Thestrup KC; Jakobsen H; Thomsen HS
Eur Urol Oncol; 2019 May; 2(3):311-319. PubMed ID: 31200846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. How to make clinical decisions to avoid unnecessary prostate screening in biopsy-naïve men with PI-RADs v2 score ≤ 3?
Zhang Y; Zeng N; Zhang F; Huang Y; Tian Y
Int J Clin Oncol; 2020 Jan; 25(1):175-186. PubMed ID: 31473884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. MRI combined with PSA density in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in patients with PSA serum levels of 4∼10ng/mL: Biparametric versus multiparametric MRI.
Han C; Liu S; Qin XB; Ma S; Zhu LN; Wang XY
Diagn Interv Imaging; 2020 Apr; 101(4):235-244. PubMed ID: 32063483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Combined Use of Prostate-specific Antigen Density and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Biopsy Decision Planning: A Retrospective Multi-institutional Study Using the Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcome Database (PROMOD).
Falagario UG; Jambor I; Lantz A; Ettala O; Stabile A; Taimen P; Aronen HJ; Knaapila J; Perez IM; Gandaglia G; Fossati N; Martini A; Cucchiara V; Picker W; Haug E; Ratnani P; Haines K; Lewis S; Sujit N; Selvaggio O; Sanguedolce F; Macarini L; Cormio L; Nordström T; Tewari A; Briganti A; Boström PJ; Carrieri G
Eur Urol Oncol; 2021 Dec; 4(6):971-979. PubMed ID: 32972896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Do all patients with suspicious prostate cancer need Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging before prostate biopsy?
Teixeira Anacleto S; Neves Alberto J; Carvalho Dias E; Sousa Passos P; Cerqueira Alves M
Arch Ital Urol Androl; 2022 Mar; 94(1):32-36. PubMed ID: 35352522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Prostate cancer detection rate in men undergoing transperineal template-guided saturation and targeted prostate biopsy.
Kaufmann B; Saba K; Schmidli TS; Stutz S; Bissig L; Britschgi AJ; Schaeren E; Gu A; Langenegger N; Sulser T; Eberli D; Keller EX; Hermanns T; Poyet C
Prostate; 2022 Feb; 82(3):388-396. PubMed ID: 34914121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Modified Predictive Model and Nomogram by Incorporating Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Clinical Indicators for Prostate Biopsy Decision Making.
Pan JF; Su R; Cao JZ; Zhao ZY; Ren DW; Ye SZ; Huang RD; Tao ZL; Yu CL; Jiang JH; Ma Q
Front Oncol; 2021; 11():740868. PubMed ID: 34589437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Added Value of Prostate-specific Antigen Density in Selecting Prostate Biopsy Candidates Among Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen and PI-RADS ≥3 Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate: A Systematic Assessment by PI-RADS Score.
Pellegrino F; Stabile A; Sorce G; Quarta L; Robesti D; Cannoletta D; Cirulli G; Barletta F; Scuderi S; Mazzone E; de Angelis M; Brembilla G; De Cobelli F; Salonia A; Montorsi F; Briganti A; Gandaglia G
Eur Urol Focus; 2023 Oct; ():. PubMed ID: 37865591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Negative Predictive Value of Biparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Significant Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Data Analysis Based on Clinical Data from Four Prospective, Registered Studies.
Knaapila J; Jambor I; Ettala O; Taimen P; Verho J; Perez IM; Kiviniemi A; Pahikkala T; Merisaari H; Lamminen T; Saunavaara J; Aronen HJ; Syvänen KT; Boström PJ
Eur Urol Focus; 2021 May; 7(3):522-531. PubMed ID: 32418878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Opportunistic Prostate Cancer Screening with Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (VISIONING).
Wetterauer C; Matthias M; Pueschel H; Deckart A; Bubendorf L; Mortezavi A; Arbelaez E; Jean Winkel D; Heye T; Boll DT; Merkle E; Hayoz S; Seifert HH; Rentsch CA
Eur Urol Focus; 2024 Feb; ():. PubMed ID: 38402105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Optimal PSA density threshold and predictive factors for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer in patient with a PI-RADS 3 lesion on MRI.
Nguyen TA; Fourcade A; Zambon A; Saout K; Deruelle C; Joulin V; Tissot V; Doucet L; Rozet F; Fournier G; Valeri A
Urol Oncol; 2023 Aug; 41(8):354.e11-354.e18. PubMed ID: 37391283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Prebiopsy IMPROD Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Combined with Prostate-Specific Antigen Density in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: An External Validation Study.
Knaapila J; Jambor I; Perez IM; Ettala O; Taimen P; Verho J; Kiviniemi A; Pahikkala T; Merisaari H; Lamminen T; Saunavaara J; Aronen HJ; Syvänen KT; Boström PJ
Eur Urol Oncol; 2020 Oct; 3(5):648-656. PubMed ID: 31501082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Predictors of prostate cancer detection in MRI PI-RADS 3 lesions - Reality of a tertiary center.
Araújo D; Gromicho A; Dias J; Bastos S; Maciel RM; Sabença A; Xambre L
Arch Ital Urol Androl; 2023 Dec; 95(4):11830. PubMed ID: 38117217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Diagnostic value of combining PI-RADS v2.1 with PSAD in clinically significant prostate cancer.
Wei X; Xu J; Zhong S; Zou J; Cheng Z; Ding Z; Zhou X
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2022 Oct; 47(10):3574-3582. PubMed ID: 35788882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Antigen Density for Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Wang S; Kozarek J; Russell R; Drescher M; Khan A; Kundra V; Barry KH; Naslund M; Siddiqui MM
Eur Urol Oncol; 2024 Apr; 7(2):189-203. PubMed ID: 37640584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Impact of biparametric prebiopsy prostate magnetic resonance imaging on the diagnostics of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy naïve men.
Knaapila J; Autio V; Jambor I; Ettala O; Verho J; Kiviniemi A; Taimen P; Perez IM; Aronen HJ; Syvänen KT; Boström PJ
Scand J Urol; 2020 Feb; 54(1):7-13. PubMed ID: 31914846
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Detection of prostate cancer using prostate imaging reporting and data system score and prostate-specific antigen density in biopsy-naive and prior biopsy-negative patients.
Ryoo H; Kang MY; Sung HH; Chang Jeong B; Seo SI; Jeon SS; Lee HM; Jeon HG
Prostate Int; 2020 Sep; 8(3):125-129. PubMed ID: 33102394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
