Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 92

1.

Current Status of MRI and PET in the NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer.

Mason BR, Eastham JA, Davis BJ, Mynderse LA, Pugh TJ, Lee RJ, Ippolito JE.

J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019 May 1;17(5):506-513. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.7306.

PMID:
31085758
2.

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. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.018. Epub 2015 Dec 2.

PMID:
26651990
3.

Multiparametric MRI to improve detection of prostate cancer compared with transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy alone: the PROMIS study.

Brown LC, Ahmed HU, Faria R, El-Shater Bosaily A, Gabe R, Kaplan RS, Parmar M, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham A, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Bott S, Burns-Cox N, Dudderidge T, Ghei M, Henderson A, Persad R, Rosario DJ, Shergill I, Winkler M, Soares M, Spackman E, Sculpher M, Emberton M.

Health Technol Assess. 2018 Jul;22(39):1-176. doi: 10.3310/hta22390.

4.

A prospective study investigating the impact of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naïve patients with clinically suspected prostate cancer: The PROKOMB study.

Baur ADJ, Henkel T, Johannsen M, Speck T, Weißbach L, Hamm B, König F.

Contemp Clin Trials. 2017 May;56:46-51. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 6.

PMID:
28279782
5.

Transperineal Versus Transrectal MRI/TRUS Fusion Targeted Biopsy: Detection Rate of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer.

Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo G, Pennisi M.

Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017 Feb;15(1):e33-e36. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2016.07.007. Epub 2016 Jul 21.

PMID:
27530436
6.

Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies.

Pokorny MR, de Rooij M, Duncan E, Schröder FH, Parkinson R, Barentsz JO, Thompson LC.

Eur Urol. 2014 Jul;66(1):22-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.03.002. Epub 2014 Mar 14.

PMID:
24666839
7.

The prostate cancer detection rates of CEUS-targeted versus MRI-targeted versus systematic TRUS-guided biopsies in biopsy-naïve men: a prospective, comparative clinical trial using the same patients.

Postema AW, Scheltema MJ, Mannaerts CK, Van Sloun RJ, Idzenga T, Mischi M, Engelbrecht MR, De la Rosette JJ, Wijkstra H.

BMC Urol. 2017 Apr 5;17(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s12894-017-0213-7.

8.

Multiparametric MRI in detection and staging of prostate cancer.

Boesen L.

Dan Med J. 2017 Feb;64(2). pii: B5327. Review.

PMID:
28157066
9.

Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-naive Men with Suspected Prostate Cancer Based on Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen Values: Results from a Randomized Prospective Blinded Controlled Trial.

Tonttila PP, Lantto J, Pääkkö E, Piippo U, Kauppila S, Lammentausta E, Ohtonen P, Vaarala MH.

Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):419-25. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024. Epub 2015 May 29.

PMID:
26033153
10.

Confirmatory biopsy of men under active surveillance: extended versus saturation versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy.

Pepe P, Cimino S, Garufi A, Priolo G, Russo GI, Giardina R, Reale G, Pennisi M, Morgia G.

Scand J Urol. 2017 Aug;51(4):260-263. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1313310. Epub 2017 May 17.

PMID:
28513296
11.

Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A, Taneja SS, Thoeny H, Villeirs G, Villers A.

Eur Urol. 2015 Dec;68(6):1045-53. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.013. Epub 2015 Feb 2. Review.

PMID:
25656808
12.

Comparing Three Different Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: A Systematic Review of In-bore versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound fusion versus Cognitive Registration. Is There a Preferred Technique?

Wegelin O, van Melick HHE, Hooft L, Bosch JLHR, Reitsma HB, Barentsz JO, Somford DM.

Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):517-531. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.041. Epub 2016 Aug 25. Review.

PMID:
27568655
13.

Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers.

Hoeks CM, Schouten MG, Bomers JG, Hoogendoorn SP, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Hambrock T, Vergunst H, Sedelaar JP, Fütterer JJ, Barentsz JO.

Eur Urol. 2012 Nov;62(5):902-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.047. Epub 2012 Feb 1.

PMID:
22325447
14.

Can MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy replace saturation prostate biopsy in the re-evaluation of men in active surveillance?

Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo G, Pennisi M.

World J Urol. 2016 Sep;34(9):1249-53. doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1749-3. Epub 2015 Dec 23.

PMID:
26699628
15.

Imaging for the selection and monitoring of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Velasquez MC, Prakash NS, Venkatramani V, Nahar B, Punnen S.

Transl Androl Urol. 2018 Apr;7(2):228-235. doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.08.13. Review.

16.

An initial negative round of targeted biopsies in men with highly suspicious multiparametric magnetic resonance findings does not exclude clinically significant prostate cancer-Preliminary experience.

Costa DN, Kay FU, Pedrosa I, Kolski L, Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG, Hornberger B, Xi Y, Francis F, Rofsky NM.

Urol Oncol. 2017 Apr;35(4):149.e15-149.e21. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.11.006. Epub 2016 Dec 9.

17.
18.

A Systematic Review on the Role of Imaging in Early Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

De Visschere PJL, Standaert C, Fütterer JJ, Villeirs GM, Panebianco V, Walz J, Maurer T, Hadaschik BA, Lecouvet FE, Giannarini G, Fanti S.

Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 Feb;2(1):47-76. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.09.010. Epub 2018 Oct 24. Review.

PMID:
30929846
19.

Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies.

Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, Quentin M, Hiester A, Godehardt E, Gabbert HE, Becker N, Antoch G, Albers P, Schimmöller L.

Eur Urol. 2015 Oct;68(4):713-20. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008. Epub 2015 Jun 23.

PMID:
26116294
20.

Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer.

Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J, Simpfendörfer T, Boxler S, Alammar K, Rieker P, Popeneciu VI, Roth W, Pahernik S, Schlemmer HP, Hohenfellner M, Hadaschik BA.

J Urol. 2013 Oct;190(4):1380-6. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043. Epub 2013 Apr 19.

PMID:
23608676

Supplemental Content

Support Center