138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37667393)
21. 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]
22. Comparison of Biparametric and Multiparametric MRI for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection With PI-RADS Version 2.1.
Tamada T; Kido A; Yamamoto A; Takeuchi M; Miyaji Y; Moriya T; Sone T
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2021 Jan; 53(1):283-291. PubMed ID: 32614123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The potential of a nomogram combined PI-RADS v2.1 and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to reduce unnecessary biopsies in prostate cancer diagnostics.
Liu Y; Wang S; Xiang LH; Xu G; Dong L; Sun Y; Ye B; Zhang Y; Xu H
Br J Radiol; 2022 Sep; 95(1138):20220209. PubMed ID: 35877385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A Novel Prediction Tool Based on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Determine the Biopsy Strategy for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with PSA Levels Less than 50 ng/ml.
He BM; Shi ZK; Li HS; Lin HZ; Yang QS; Lu JP; Sun YH; Wang HF
Ann Surg Oncol; 2020 Apr; 27(4):1284-1295. PubMed ID: 31848822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Comparison of a Deep Learning-Accelerated vs. Conventional T2-Weighted Sequence in Biparametric MRI of the Prostate.
Tong A; Bagga B; Petrocelli R; Smereka P; Vij A; Qian K; Grimm R; Kamen A; Keerthivasan MB; Nickel MD; von Busch H; Chandarana H
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2023 Oct; 58(4):1055-1064. PubMed ID: 36651358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of biparametric prostate MRI for prostate cancer in men at risk.
Bass EJ; Pantovic A; Connor M; Gabe R; Padhani AR; Rockall A; Sokhi H; Tam H; Winkler M; Ahmed HU
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2021 Sep; 24(3):596-611. PubMed ID: 33219368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [The value of machine learning models based on biparametric MRI for diagnosis of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer].
Qiao XM; Hu CH; Hu S; Hu CH; Wang XM; Shen JK; Ji LB; Song Y; Bao J
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2023 May; 103(19):1446-1454. PubMed ID: 37198106
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Investigating the equivalent performance of biparametric compared to multiparametric MRI in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.
Wang B; Gao J; Zhang Q; Zhang C; Liu G; Wei W; Huang H; Fu Y; Li D; Zhang B; Guo H
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2020 Feb; 45(2):547-555. PubMed ID: 31907568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Diagnostic accuracy of biparametric versus multiparametric prostate MRI: assessment of contrast benefit in clinical practice.
Zawaideh JP; Sala E; Shaida N; Koo B; Warren AY; Carmisciano L; Saeb-Parsy K; Gnanapragasam VJ; Kastner C; Barrett T
Eur Radiol; 2020 Jul; 30(7):4039-4049. PubMed ID: 32166495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Development and validation of a predictive model for determining clinically significant prostate cancer in men with negative magnetic resonance imaging after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.
Liu G; Zhu Y; Yao Z; Jiang Y; Wu B; Bai S
Prostate; 2021 Sep; 81(13):983-991. PubMed ID: 34254330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. MultiParametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Nomogram for Predicting Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men Undergoing Repeat Prostate Biopsy.
Huang C; Song G; Wang H; Ji G; Li J; Chen Y; Fan Y; Fang D; Xiong G; Xin Z; Zhou L
Biomed Res Int; 2018; 2018():6368309. PubMed ID: 30276213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Comparison of biparametric versus multiparametric prostate MRI for the detection of extracapsular extension and seminal vesicle invasion in biopsy naïve patients.
Caglic I; Sushentsev N; Shah N; Warren AY; Lamb BW; Barrett T
Eur J Radiol; 2021 Aug; 141():109804. PubMed ID: 34062473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. Diagnostic Accuracy and Value of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Transperineal Targeted and Template Systematic Prostate Biopsy Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Noh TI; Tae JH; Kim HK; Shim JS; Kang SG; Sung DJ; Cheon J; Lee JG; Kang SH
Cancer Res Treat; 2020 Jul; 52(3):714-721. PubMed ID: 32054151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The Utility of Combined Target and Systematic Prostate Biopsies in the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 Based on Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Kato D; Ozawa K; Takeuchi S; Kawase M; Kawase K; Nakai C; Takai M; Iinuma K; Nakane K; Kato H; Matsuo M; Suzui N; Miyazaki T; Koie T
Curr Oncol; 2021 Mar; 28(2):1294-1301. PubMed ID: 33809967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Optimizing detection of clinically significant prostate cancer through nomograms incorporating mri, clinical features, and advanced serum biomarkers in biopsy naïve men.
Siddiqui MR; Li EV; Kumar SKSR; Busza A; Lin JS; Mahenthiran AK; Aguiar JA; Shah PV; Ansbro B; Rich JM; Moataz SAS; Keeter MK; Mai Q; Mi X; Tosoian JJ; Schaeffer EM; Patel HD; Ross AE
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2023 Sep; 26(3):588-595. PubMed ID: 36973367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. A Predictive Model Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Parameters for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population.
Noh TI; Hyun CW; Kang HE; Jin HJ; Tae JH; Shim JS; Kang SG; Sung DJ; Cheon J; Lee JG; Kang SH
Cancer Res Treat; 2021 Oct; 53(4):1148-1155. PubMed ID: 33421975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection With Biparametric MRI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Cuocolo R; Verde F; Ponsiglione A; Romeo V; Petretta M; Imbriaco M; Stanzione A
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Mar; 216(3):608-621. PubMed ID: 33502226
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification in Men With a Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer Using a Unique Biparametric MRI and Expression of 11 Genes in Apparently Benign Tissue: Evaluation Using Machine-Learning Techniques.
Montoya Perez I; Jambor I; Pahikkala T; Airola A; Merisaari H; Saunavaara J; Alinezhad S; Väänänen RM; Tallgrén T; Verho J; Kiviniemi A; Ettala O; Knaapila J; Syvänen KT; Kallajoki M; Vainio P; Aronen HJ; Pettersson K; Boström PJ; Taimen P
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2020 May; 51(5):1540-1553. PubMed ID: 31588660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. The role of prostate-specific antigen density and negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in excluding prostate cancer for biopsy-naïve men: clinical outcomes from a high-volume center in China.
Zhang CC; Tu X; Lin TH; Cai DM; Yang L; Nie L; Qiu S; Liu ZH; Jin K; Li JK; Xiong XY; Yang L; Wei Q
Asian J Androl; 2022; 24(6):615-619. PubMed ID: 35532555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
