127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37675732)
1. Prospective analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of digital rectal examination and magnetic resonance imaging for T staging of prostate cancer.
Zhu J; Wu X; Xue Y; Li X; Zheng Q; Xue X; Huang Z; Chen S
J Cancer Res Ther; 2023 Aug; 19(4):1024-1030. PubMed ID: 37675732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Multiparametric MRI in detection and staging of prostate cancer.
Boesen L
Dan Med J; 2017 Feb; 64(2):. PubMed ID: 28157066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy in the detection of high-grade prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve patients with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who underwent the Select MDx test.
Lendínez-Cano G; Ojeda-Claro AV; Gómez-Gómez E; Morales Jimenez P; Flores Martin J; Dominguez JF; Amores J; Cozar JM; Bachiller J; Juárez A; Linares R; Garcia Galisteo E; Alvarez Ossorio JL; Requena Tapia MJ; Moreno Jimenez J; Medina Lopez RA;
Prostate; 2021 Sep; 81(12):857-865. PubMed ID: 34184761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prediction of prostate cancer risk: the role of prostate volume and digital rectal examination in the ERSPC risk calculators.
Roobol MJ; van Vugt HA; Loeb S; Zhu X; Bul M; Bangma CH; van Leenders AG; Steyerberg EW; Schröder FH
Eur Urol; 2012 Mar; 61(3):577-83. PubMed ID: 22104592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based T-staging to Predict Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy: A Step Towards the iTNM Classification.
Baboudjian M; Gondran-Tellier B; Touzani A; Martini A; Diamand R; Roche JB; Lacetera V; Beauval JB; Roumeguère T; Simone G; Benamran D; Fourcade A; Fiard G; van den Bergh RCN; Peltier A; Ploussard G
Eur Urol Oncol; 2023 Aug; 6(4):406-413. PubMed ID: 36280445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Digital Rectal Examination Is Not a Useful Screening Test for Prostate Cancer.
Krilaviciute A; Becker N; Lakes J; Radtke JP; Kuczyk M; Peters I; Harke NN; Debus J; Koerber SA; Herkommer K; Gschwend JE; Meissner VH; Benner A; Seibold P; Kristiansen G; Hadaschik B; Arsov C; Schimmöller L; Giesel FL; Antoch G; Makowski M; Wacker F; Schlemmer HP; Kaaks R; Albers P
Eur Urol Oncol; 2023 Dec; 6(6):566-573. PubMed ID: 37806841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Prostate Cancer Staging and European Association of Urology Risk Classification.
Draulans C; Everaerts W; Isebaert S; Gevaert T; Oyen R; Joniau S; Lerut E; De Wever L; Weynand B; Vanhoutte E; De Meerleer G; Haustermans K
Urology; 2019 Aug; 130():113-119. PubMed ID: 31051166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Should Be Preferred Over Digital Rectal Examination for Prostate Cancer Local Staging and Disease Risk Classification.
Soeterik TFW; van Melick HHE; Dijksman LM; Biesma DH; Witjes JA; van Basten JA
Urology; 2021 Jan; 147():205-212. PubMed ID: 33129868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Role of pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging in staging of prostate cancer specifically in patients diagnosed with clinically locally advanced tumours by digital rectal examination.
Xylinas E; Yates DR; Renard-Penna R; Seringe E; Bousquet JC; Comperat E; Bitker MO; Grenier P; Rouprêt M
World J Urol; 2013 Aug; 31(4):881-6. PubMed ID: 22193518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The impact of local staging of prostate cancer determined on MRI or DRE at time of radical prostatectomy on progression-free survival: A Will Rogers phenomenon.
Rakauskas A; Peters M; Ball D; Kim NH; Ahmed HU; Winkler M; Shah TT
Urol Oncol; 2023 Feb; 41(2):106.e9-106.e16. PubMed ID: 36564258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risk-based Patient Selection for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy after Negative Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Random Biopsy Avoids Unnecessary Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scans.
Alberts AR; Schoots IG; Bokhorst LP; van Leenders GJ; Bangma CH; Roobol MJ
Eur Urol; 2016 Jun; 69(6):1129-34. PubMed ID: 26651990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The role of the digital rectal examination as diagnostic test for prostate cancer detection in obese patients.
Dell'Atti L
J BUON; 2015; 20(6):1601-5. PubMed ID: 26854458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The additive value of mpMRI on prostate cancer detection: Comparison between patients with and without a suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE).
Omri N; Alex S; Jacob B; Ofer N
Urol Oncol; 2021 Oct; 39(10):728.e7-728.e11. PubMed ID: 33454199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A prospective analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of 3 T MRI, CT and endoscopic ultrasound for preoperative T staging of potentially resectable esophageal cancer.
Guo J; Wang Z; Qin J; Zhang H; Liu W; Zhao Y; Lu Y; Yan X; Zhang Z; Zhang T; Zhang S; Dominik NM; Kamel IR; Li H; Qu J
Cancer Imaging; 2020 Sep; 20(1):64. PubMed ID: 32912319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate biopsy and digital rectal examination in the preoperative anatomical localization of prostate cancer.
Mullerad M; Hricak H; Kuroiwa K; Pucar D; Chen HN; Kattan MW; Scardino PT
J Urol; 2005 Dec; 174(6):2158-63. PubMed ID: 16280755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A Prospective Comparison of
Anttinen M; Ettala O; Malaspina S; Jambor I; Sandell M; Kajander S; Rinta-Kiikka I; Schildt J; Saukko E; Rautio P; Timonen KL; Matikainen T; Noponen T; Saunavaara J; Löyttyniemi E; Taimen P; Kemppainen J; Dean PB; Blanco Sequeiros R; Aronen HJ; Seppänen M; Boström PJ
Eur Urol Oncol; 2021 Aug; 4(4):635-644. PubMed ID: 32675047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Integration of MRI to clinical nomogram for predicting pathological stage before radical prostatectomy.
Lebacle C; Roudot-Thoraval F; Moktefi A; Bouanane M; De La Taille A; Salomon L
World J Urol; 2017 Sep; 35(9):1409-1415. PubMed ID: 27995303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging outperforms the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator in predicting clinically significant prostate cancer.
Salami SS; Vira MA; Turkbey B; Fakhoury M; Yaskiv O; Villani R; Ben-Levi E; Rastinehad AR
Cancer; 2014 Sep; 120(18):2876-82. PubMed ID: 24917122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A comparison of magnetic resonance imaging techniques used to secure biopsies in prostate cancer patients.
van Luijtelaar A; Bomers J; Fütterer J
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther; 2019 Aug; 19(8):705-716. PubMed ID: 31277551
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted vs. conventional transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: single-institution, matched cohort comparison.
Kim EH; Vemana G; Johnson MH; Vetter JM; Rensing AJ; Strother MC; Fowler KJ; Andriole GL
Urol Oncol; 2015 Mar; 33(3):109.e1-6. PubMed ID: 25655682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
