387 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34243992)
1. Can high b-value 3.0 T biparametric MRI with the Simplified Prostate Image Reporting and Data System (S-PI-RADS) be used in biopsy-naïve men?
Wang G; Yu G; Chen J; Yang G; Xu H; Chen Z; Wang G; Bai Z
Clin Imaging; 2022 Aug; 88():80-86. PubMed ID: 34243992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Head-to-head comparison of biparametric versus multiparametric MRI of the prostate before robot-assisted transperineal fusion prostate biopsy.
Thaiss WM; Moser S; Hepp T; Kruck S; Rausch S; Scharpf M; Nikolaou K; Stenzl A; Bedke J; Kaufmann S
World J Urol; 2022 Oct; 40(10):2431-2438. PubMed ID: 35922717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effectiveness and Accuracy of MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy Based on PI-RADS v2.1 Category in Transition/Peripheral Zone of the Prostate.
Liu Y; Wang S; Xu G; Zhou B; Zhang Y; Ye B; Xiang L; Zhang Y; Xu H
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2023 Sep; 58(3):709-717. PubMed ID: 36773016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Analysis of the relationship between PI-RADS scores and the pathological results of targeted biopsy based on MRI].
Wang YM; Shang JW; Dong L; Liang LH; Zhao RZ; Liang C; Wang SQ; Xia W; Cheng G; Hua LX
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2023 Nov; 45(11):942-947. PubMed ID: 37968079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of clinically significant prostate cancer using biparametric magnetic resonance imaging: An evolving concept.
Mahajan M; Gupta V; Gupta P; Sharma P; Abrol D
J Cancer Res Ther; 2022; 18(6):1640-1645. PubMed ID: 36412424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Development and validation of a nomogram based on biparametric MRI PI-RADS v2.1 and clinical parameters to avoid unnecessary prostate biopsies.
Wang Y; Wang L; Tang X; Zhang Y; Zhang N; Zhi B; Niu X
BMC Med Imaging; 2023 Aug; 23(1):106. PubMed ID: 37582697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Structured approach to resolving discordance between PI-RADS v2.1 score and targeted prostate biopsy results: an opportunity for quality improvement.
Arcot R; Sekar S; Kotamarti S; Krischak M; Michael ZD; Foo WC; Huang J; Polascik TJ; Gupta RT
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2022 Aug; 47(8):2917-2927. PubMed ID: 35674785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Prevalence of Prostate Cancer in PI-RADS Version 2.1 Transition Zone Atypical Nodules Upgraded by Abnormal DWI: Correlation With MRI-Directed TRUS-Guided Targeted Biopsy.
Lim CS; Abreu-Gomez J; Carrion I; Schieda N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Mar; 216(3):683-690. PubMed ID: 32755208
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [Preliminary applicability evaluation of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 diagnostic score in 3.0T multi-parameters magnetic resonance imaging combined with prostate specific antigen density for prostate cancer].
Zuo MZ; Zhao WL; Wei CG; Zhang CY; Wen R; Gu YF; Li MJ; Zhang YY; Wu JF; Li X; Shen JK
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2017 Dec; 97(47):3693-3698. PubMed ID: 29325321
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Can Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies in men with PSA levels of 4-10 ng/ml?
Xu N; Wu YP; Chen DN; Ke ZB; Cai H; Wei Y; Zheng QS; Huang JB; Li XD; Xue XY
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol; 2018 May; 144(5):987-995. PubMed ID: 29504080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Can the addition of clinical information improve the accuracy of PI-RADS version 2 for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer in positive MRI?
Polanec SH; Bickel H; Wengert GJ; Arnoldner M; Clauser P; Susani M; Shariat SF; Pinker K; Helbich TH; Baltzer PAT
Clin Radiol; 2020 Feb; 75(2):157.e1-157.e7. PubMed ID: 31690449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Role of PSA Density among PI-RADS v2.1 Categories to Avoid an Unnecessary Transition Zone Biopsy in Patients with PSA 4-20 ng/mL.
Wang ZB; Wei CG; Zhang YY; Pan P; Dai GC; Tu J; Shen JK
Biomed Res Int; 2021; 2021():3995789. PubMed ID: 34671673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Analysis of PI-RADS 4 cases: Management recommendations for negatively biopsied patients.
Ullrich T; Arsov C; Quentin M; Laqua N; Klingebiel M; Martin O; Hiester A; Blondin D; Rabenalt R; Albers P; Antoch G; Schimmöller L
Eur J Radiol; 2019 Apr; 113():1-6. PubMed ID: 30927932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prospective PI-RADS v2.1 Atypical Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Nodules With Marked Restricted Diffusion: Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer on Multiparametric MRI.
Costa DN; Jia L; Subramanian N; Xi Y; Rofsky NM; Recchimuzzi DZ; de Leon AD; Arraj P; Pedrosa I
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Aug; 217(2):395-403. PubMed ID: 32876473
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Biparametric Quantitative MRI for Prostate Cancer Detection.
Uyanik M; Vigneswaran HT; Hale GR; Gann P; Magin R; Abern MR
Top Magn Reson Imaging; 2023 Dec; 32(6):66-72. PubMed ID: 38051029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Using Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) Scores to Select an Optimal Prostate Biopsy Method: A Secondary Analysis of the Trio Study.
Ahdoot M; Lebastchi AH; Long L; Wilbur AR; Gomella PT; Mehralivand S; Daneshvar MA; Yerram NK; O'Connor LP; Wang AZ; Gurram S; Bloom J; Siddiqui MM; Linehan WM; Merino M; Choyke PL; Pinsky P; Parnes H; Shih JH; Turkbey B; Wood BJ; Pinto PA;
Eur Urol Oncol; 2022 Apr; 5(2):176-186. PubMed ID: 33846112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Systematic versus Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy among Men with Visible Lesions.
Patel HD; Koehne EL; Shea SM; Fang AM; Gorbonos A; Quek ML; Flanigan RC; Goldberg A; Rais-Bahrami S; Gupta GN
J Urol; 2022 Jan; 207(1):108-117. PubMed ID: 34428091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Diagnostic efficacy of prostate cancer using targeted biopsy with 6-core systematic biopsy for patients with PI-RADS 5].
Liu Y; Yuan CW; Wu JY; Shen Q; Xiao JX; Zhao Z; Wang XY; Li XS; He ZS; Zhou LQ
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2023 Oct; 55(5):812-817. PubMed ID: 37807733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prospective comparison of a fast 1.5-T biparametric with the 3.0-T multiparametric ESUR magnetic resonance imaging protocol as a triage test for men at risk of prostate cancer.
Van Nieuwenhove S; Saussez TP; Thiry S; Trefois P; Annet L; Michoux N; Lecouvet F; Tombal B
BJU Int; 2019 Mar; 123(3):411-420. PubMed ID: 30240059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
