Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 102

1.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Kasivisvanathan V, Stabile A, Neves JB, Giganti F, Valerio M, Shanmugabavan Y, Clement KD, Sarkar D, Philippou Y, Thurtle D, Deeks J, Emberton M, Takwoingi Y, Moore CM.

Eur Urol. 2019 Sep;76(3):284-303. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.04.043. Epub 2019 May 24. Review.

PMID:
31130434
2.

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
3.

Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging, with or Without Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy, and Systematic Biopsy for Detecting Prostate Cancer: A Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Drost FH, Osses D, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Steyerberg EW, Roobol MJ, Schoots IG.

Eur Urol. 2019 Jul 17. pii: S0302-2838(19)30513-5. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.06.023. [Epub ahead of print] Review.

PMID:
31326219
4.

Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Schoots IG, Roobol MJ, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Steyerberg EW, Hunink MG.

Eur Urol. 2015 Sep;68(3):438-50. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.037. Epub 2014 Dec 3. Review.

PMID:
25480312
5.

Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-stratified Clinical Pathways and Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy Pathway for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Woo S, Suh CH, Eastham JA, Zelefsky MJ, Morris MJ, Abida W, Scher HI, Sidlow R, Becker AS, Wibmer AG, Hricak H, Vargas HA.

Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 Jun 13. pii: S2588-9311(19)30071-9. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.05.004. [Epub ahead of print] Review.

PMID:
31204311
6.

The value of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography (MRI/US)-fusion biopsy platforms in prostate cancer detection: a systematic review.

Gayet M, van der Aa A, Beerlage HP, Schrier BP, Mulders PF, Wijkstra H.

BJU Int. 2016 Mar;117(3):392-400. doi: 10.1111/bju.13247. Epub 2015 Aug 28. Review.

7.

Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy: A Systematic Review.

Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, Ehdaie B, Hadaschik BA, Marks LS, Mozer P, Rastinehad AR, Ahmed HU.

Eur Urol. 2015 Jul;68(1):8-19. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.026. Epub 2014 Nov 1. Review.

PMID:
25454618
8.

Relationship Between Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Biopsy Indication, and MRI-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy Outcomes.

Meng X, Rosenkrantz AB, Mendhiratta N, Fenstermaker M, Huang R, Wysock JS, Bjurlin MA, Marshall S, Deng FM, Zhou M, Melamed J, Huang WC, Lepor H, Taneja SS.

Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):512-7. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.005. Epub 2015 Jun 22.

9.

Comparison of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy With Systematic Biopsy Alone for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Elwenspoek MMC, Sheppard AL, McInnes MDF, Merriel SWD, Rowe EWJ, Bryant RJ, Donovan JL, Whiting P.

JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Aug 2;2(8):e198427. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.8427.

10.

The diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance spectroscopy and enhanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques in aiding the localisation of prostate abnormalities for biopsy: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Mowatt G, Scotland G, Boachie C, Cruickshank M, Ford JA, Fraser C, Kurban L, Lam TB, Padhani AR, Royle J, Scheenen TW, Tassie E.

Health Technol Assess. 2013 May;17(20):vii-xix, 1-281. doi: 10.3310/hta17200. Review.

11.

Is magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy a useful addition to systematic confirmatory biopsy in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Schoots IG, Nieboer D, Giganti F, Moore CM, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ.

BJU Int. 2018 Dec;122(6):946-958. doi: 10.1111/bju.14358. Epub 2018 Jun 6.

PMID:
29679430
12.

Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review.

Moore CM, Robertson NL, Arsanious N, Middleton T, Villers A, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Emberton M.

Eur Urol. 2013 Jan;63(1):125-40. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.004. Epub 2012 Jun 13. Review.

PMID:
22743165
13.

The FUTURE Trial: A Multicenter Randomised Controlled Trial on Target Biopsy Techniques Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in Patients with Prior Negative Biopsies.

Wegelin O, Exterkate L, van der Leest M, Kummer JA, Vreuls W, de Bruin PC, Bosch JLHR, Barentsz JO, Somford DM, van Melick HHE.

Eur Urol. 2019 Apr;75(4):582-590. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.040. Epub 2018 Dec 3.

PMID:
30522912
14.

Complications and Adverse Events of Three Magnetic Resonance Imaging-based Target Biopsy Techniques in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer Among Men with Prior Negative Biopsies: Results from the FUTURE Trial, a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial.

Wegelin O, Exterkate L, van der Leest M, Kelder JC, Bosch JLHR, Barentsz JO, Somford DM, van Melick HHE.

Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 Sep 10. pii: S2588-9311(19)30133-6. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.08.007. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID:
31519516
15.

Is There Still a Need for Repeated Systematic Biopsies in Patients with Previous Negative Biopsies in the Era of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsies of the Prostate?

Exterkate L, Wegelin O, Barentsz JO, van der Leest MG, Kummer JA, Vreuls W, de Bruin PC, Bosch JLHR, van Melick HHE, Somford DM.

Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 Jun 22. pii: S2588-9311(19)30080-X. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.06.005. [Epub ahead of print]

PMID:
31239236
16.

Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].

Fenton JJ, Weyrich MS, Durbin S, Liu Y, Bang H, Melnikow J.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018 May.

17.

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
18.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided In-bore and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Prostate Biopsies: An Adjusted Comparison of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Rate.

Costa DN, Goldberg K, Leon AD, Lotan Y, Xi Y, Aziz M, Freifeld Y, Margulis V, Raj G, Roehrborn CG, Hornberger B, Desai N, Bagrodia A, Francis F, Pedrosa I, Cadeddu JA.

Eur Urol Oncol. 2019 Jul;2(4):397-404. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.08.022. Epub 2018 Sep 20.

PMID:
31277776
19.

Elastic Versus Rigid Image Registration in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Venderink W, de Rooij M, Sedelaar JPM, Huisman HJ, Fütterer JJ.

Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Mar;4(2):219-227. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2016.07.003. Epub 2016 Jul 29.

PMID:
28753777
20.

Screening for prostate cancer.

Ilic D, Neuberger MM, Djulbegovic M, Dahm P.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jan 31;(1):CD004720. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004720.pub3. Review.

PMID:
23440794

Supplemental Content

Support Center