167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38263825)
1. Risk stratification of prostate cancer with MRI and prostate-specific antigen density-based tool for personalized decision making.
Rajendran I; Lee KL; Thavaraja L; Barrett T
Br J Radiol; 2024 Jan; 97(1153):113-119. PubMed ID: 38263825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Risk-based MRI-directed diagnostic pathway outperforms non-risk-based pathways in suspected prostate cancer biopsy-naïve men: a large cohort validation study.
Bittencourt LK; Guricova K; Zucker I; Durieux JC; Schoots IG
Eur Radiol; 2022 Apr; 32(4):2330-2339. PubMed ID: 35028750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
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. 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]
6. [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]
7. PI-RADS Upgrading Rules: Impact on Prostate Cancer Detection and Biopsy Avoidance of MRI-Directed Diagnostic Pathways.
de Oliveira Correia ET; Purysko AS; Paranhos BM; Shoag JE; Padhani AR; Bittencourt LK
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2024 May; ():1-11. PubMed ID: 38353450
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Avoiding unnecessary biopsy: the combination of PRIMARY score with prostate-specific antigen density for prostate biopsy decision.
Guo S; Zhang J; Wang Y; Jiao J; Li Z; Cui C; Chen J; Yang W; Ma S; Wu P; Jing Y; Wen W; Kang F; Wang J; Qin W
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2024 Jun; 27(2):288-293. PubMed ID: 38160227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Incorporation of trans-rectal color doppler flow imaging and risk-stratification nomogram reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies in suspected prostate cancer patients: a bi-centered retrospective validation study.
Guo Y; Su K; Lu M; Liu X
BMC Urol; 2023 May; 23(1):81. PubMed ID: 37138271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prostate biopsy in the era of MRI-targeting: towards a judicious use of additional systematic biopsy.
Deniffel D; Perlis N; Ghai S; Girgis S; Healy GM; Fleshner N; Hamilton R; Kulkarni G; Toi A; van der Kwast T; Zlotta A; Finelli A; Haider MA
Eur Radiol; 2022 Nov; 32(11):7544-7554. PubMed ID: 35507051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Multi-institutional analysis of clinical and imaging risk factors for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in men with PI-RADS 3 lesions.
Fang AM; Shumaker LA; Martin KD; Jackson JC; Fan RE; Khajir G; Patel HD; Soodana-Prakash N; Vourganti S; Filson CP; Sonn GA; Sprenkle PC; Gupta GN; Punnen S; Rais-Bahrami S
Cancer; 2022 Sep; 128(18):3287-3296. PubMed ID: 35819253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Avoiding Unnecessary Biopsy: MRI-based Risk Models versus a PI-RADS and PSA Density Strategy for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.
Deniffel D; Healy GM; Dong X; Ghai S; Salinas-Miranda E; Fleshner N; Hamilton R; Kulkarni G; Toi A; van der Kwast T; Zlotta A; Finelli A; Perlis N; Haider MA
Radiology; 2021 Aug; 300(2):369-379. PubMed ID: 34032510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Improving the Early Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Men in the Challenging Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 3 Category.
Morote J; Campistol M; Triquell M; Celma A; Regis L; de Torres I; Semidey ME; Mast R; Santamaria A; Planas J; Trilla E
Eur Urol Open Sci; 2022 Mar; 37():38-44. PubMed ID: 35243388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Elucidating the need for prostate cancer risk calculators in conjunction with mpMRI in initial risk assessment before prostate biopsy at a tertiary prostate cancer center.
Krausewitz P; Büttner T; von Danwitz M; Weiten R; Cox A; Klümper N; Stein J; Luetkens J; Kristiansen G; Ritter M; Ellinger J
BMC Urol; 2024 Mar; 24(1):71. PubMed ID: 38532370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naïve Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study.
van der Leest M; Cornel E; Israël B; Hendriks R; Padhani AR; Hoogenboom M; Zamecnik P; Bakker D; Setiasti AY; Veltman J; van den Hout H; van der Lelij H; van Oort I; Klaver S; Debruyne F; Sedelaar M; Hannink G; Rovers M; Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C; Barentsz JO
Eur Urol; 2019 Apr; 75(4):570-578. PubMed ID: 30477981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naïve patients.
Washino S; Okochi T; Saito K; Konishi T; Hirai M; Kobayashi Y; Miyagawa T
BJU Int; 2017 Feb; 119(2):225-233. PubMed ID: 26935594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Combining clinical and MRI data to manage PI-RADS 3 lesions and reduce excessive biopsy.
Yang S; Zhao W; Tan S; Zhang Y; Wei C; Chen T; Shen J
Transl Androl Urol; 2020 Jun; 9(3):1252-1261. PubMed ID: 32676408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
