164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38614971)
21. Evaluation of systematic prostate biopsies when performing transperineal MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy with needle tracking-what is the additional value?
Günzel K; Magheli A; Busch J; Baco E; Cash H; Heinrich S; Edler D; Schostak M; Borgmann H; Schlegel J; Hinz S
Int Urol Nephrol; 2022 Oct; 54(10):2477-2483. PubMed ID: 35877030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Diagnostic Performance of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography-targeted biopsy for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Kawada T; Yanagisawa T; Rajwa P; Sari Motlagh R; Mostafaei H; Quhal F; Laukhtina E; Aydh A; König F; Pallauf M; Pradere B; Ceci F; Baltzer PAT; Hacker M; Rasul S; Karakiewicz PI; Araki M; Nasu Y; Shariat SF
Eur Urol Oncol; 2022 Aug; 5(4):390-400. PubMed ID: 35715320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Dual-tracer PET/CT-targeted, mpMRI-targeted, systematic biopsy, and combined biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a pilot study.
Qiu DX; Li J; Zhang JW; Chen MF; Gao XM; Tang YX; Zhang Y; Yi XP; Yin HL; Gan Y; Wang GL; Zu XB; Hu S; Cai Y
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2022 Jul; 49(8):2821-2832. PubMed ID: 34860277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A Prospective Comparison of Transrectal Standard, Cognitive, Transperineal Fusion, and Mapping Prostate Biopsy for Cancer Detection.
Petov V; Bazarkin A; Morozov A; Taratkin M; Ganzha T; Danilov S; Chernov Y; Chinenov D; Rzayev R; Suvorov A; Amosov A; Fajkovic H; Enikeev D; Krupinov G
J Endourol; 2023 Aug; 37(8):940-947. PubMed ID: 37294206
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. [Correlation analysis between prostate imaging report and data system score and pathological results of prostate cancer].
Zhu LY; Ding XF; Huang TB; Luan Y; Guo CH; Xu YZ; Wang F
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Sep; 100(34):2663-2668. PubMed ID: 32921014
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. 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]
27. Risk and predictors of adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy in patients diagnosed with IUSP 1-2 prostate cancer at MRI-targeted biopsy: a multicenter analysis.
Kesch C; Pantea V; Soeterik T; Marquis A; la Bombarda G; Morlacco A; Barletta F; Radtke JP; Darr C; Preisser F; Zattoni F; Marra G; van den Bergh RCN; Hadaschik B; Gandaglia G;
World J Urol; 2023 Feb; 41(2):427-434. PubMed ID: 36534151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of Regional Saturation Biopsy, Targeted Biopsy, and Systematic Biopsy in Patients with Prostate-specific Antigen Levels of 4-20 ng/ml: A Prospective, Single-center, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Jiang X; Chen M; Tian J; Li X; Liu R; Wang Y; Zhao Y; Peng S; Niu Y; Xu Y
Eur Urol Oncol; 2023 Dec; ():. PubMed ID: 38158249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. MRI-based analysis of different clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate of prostate imaging reporting and data system score 4 in the peripheral zone.
Sun Z; Wang H; Fu W; Zhu S; Song G
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2023 Jan; 48(1):390-398. PubMed ID: 36305943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Diagnostic Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naïve Men: A Meta-Analysis.
Tu X; Liu Z; Zhang C; Chang T; Xu H; Bao Y; Li J; Jin K; Yuan Q; Qiu S; Yang L; Wei Q
Urol Int; 2020; 104(3-4):187-198. PubMed ID: 31825927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Value of cognitive fusion targeted and standard systematic transrectal prostate biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis.
Yu LP; Du YQ; Sun YR; Qin CP; Yang WB; Huang ZX; Xu T
Asian J Androl; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38783630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A novel nomogram to identify candidates for active surveillance amongst patients with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group (GG) 1 or ISUP GG2 prostate cancer, according to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings.
Luzzago S; de Cobelli O; Cozzi G; Peveri G; Bagnardi V; Catellani M; Di Trapani E; Mistretta FA; Pricolo P; Conti A; Alessi S; Marvaso G; Ferro M; Matei DV; Renne G; Jereczek-Fossa BA; Petralia G; Musi G
BJU Int; 2020 Jul; 126(1):104-113. PubMed ID: 32150328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. MRI-Fusion Targeted vs. Systematic Prostate Biopsy-How Does the Biopsy Technique Affect Gleason Grade Concordance and Upgrading After Radical Prostatectomy?
Rührup J; Preisser F; Theißen L; Wenzel M; Roos FC; Becker A; Kluth LA; Bodelle B; Köllermann J; Chun FKH; Mandel P
Front Surg; 2019; 6():55. PubMed ID: 31620444
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Performance of Combined Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided and Systematic Biopsy of the Prostate in Biopsy-naïve Patients and Patients with Prior Biopsies.
Preisser F; Theissen L; Wenzel M; Humke C; Bodelle B; Köllermann J; Kluth L; Banek S; Becker A; Roos F; Chun FK; Mandel P
Eur Urol Focus; 2021 Jan; 7(1):39-46. PubMed ID: 31296485
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Prostate cancer: diagnostic yield of modified transrectal ultrasound-guided twelve-core combined biopsy (targeted plus systematic biopsies) using prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging.
Song C; Park SY
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2021 Oct; 46(10):4974-4983. PubMed ID: 34181040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Positive Predictive Value of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Mazzone E; Stabile A; Pellegrino F; Basile G; Cignoli D; Cirulli GO; Sorce G; Barletta F; Scuderi S; Bravi CA; Cucchiara V; Fossati N; Gandaglia G; Montorsi F; Briganti A
Eur Urol Oncol; 2021 Oct; 4(5):697-713. PubMed ID: 33358543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. Diagnostic Pathway with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Standard Pathway: Results from a Randomized Prospective Study in Biopsy-naïve Patients with Suspected Prostate Cancer.
Porpiglia F; Manfredi M; Mele F; Cossu M; Bollito E; Veltri A; Cirillo S; Regge D; Faletti R; Passera R; Fiori C; De Luca S
Eur Urol; 2017 Aug; 72(2):282-288. PubMed ID: 27574821
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Evaluation of the optimal strategy in men with a single unilateral suspicious lesion on MRI undergoing transperineal MRI/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy.
Yusim I; Mazor E; Frumkin E; Jabareen M; Hefer B; Elsaraya N; Li S; Rouvinov K; Novack V; Mabjeesh NJ
Prostate; 2023 Sep; 83(13):1255-1262. PubMed ID: 37263774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Is it necessary for all patients with suspicious lesions undergo systematic biopsy in the era of MRI-TRUS fusion targeted biopsy?
Lv Z; Wang J; Wang M; Hou H; Song L; Li H; Wang X; Liu M
Int Braz J Urol; 2023; 49(3):359-371. PubMed ID: 37115180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
