160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38402105)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
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. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
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. Diagnostic Accuracy of Single-plane Biparametric and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial in Biopsy-naïve Men.
Russo F; Mazzetti S; Regge D; Ambrosini I; Giannini V; Manfredi M; De Luca S; Bollito E; Porpiglia F
Eur Urol Oncol; 2021 Dec; 4(6):855-862. PubMed ID: 33893066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Can the combination of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging and PSA-related indicators predict the prostate biopsy outcome?
Zhu J; Liang Z; Song Y; Yang Y; Xu Y; Lu Y; Hu R; Ou N; Zhang W; Liu X
Andrologia; 2020 Nov; 52(10):e13734. PubMed ID: 32609397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men: The Biparametric MRI for Detection of Prostate Cancer (BIDOC) Study.
Boesen L; Nørgaard N; Løgager V; Balslev I; Bisbjerg R; Thestrup KC; Winther MD; Jakobsen H; Thomsen HS
JAMA Netw Open; 2018 Jun; 1(2):e180219. PubMed ID: 30646066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Lifetime Health and Economic Outcomes of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging as First-Line Screening for Prostate Cancer : A Decision Model Analysis.
Gulati R; Jiao B; Al-Faouri R; Sharma V; Kaul S; Fleishman A; Wymer K; Boorjian SA; Olumi AF; Etzioni R; Gershman B
Ann Intern Med; 2024 Jun; ():. PubMed ID: 38830219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates between magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System in patients with PSA ≥4 ng/mL: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhu K; Qin Z; Xue J; Miao C; Tian Y; Liu S; Zhu S; Gu Q; Hou C; Xu A; Yang J; Wang Z
Transl Androl Urol; 2019 Dec; 8(6):741-753. PubMed ID: 32038971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
