Preoperative staging using magnetic resonance imaging and risk of positive surgical margins after prostate-cancer surgery
暂无分享,去创建一个
P. Wiklund | T. Nyberg | M. Aly | L. Blomqvist | S. Carlsson | O. Akre | C. Adding | M. Olsson | Michael Öberg | J. Björklund | F. Jäderling
[1] D. Margolis,et al. MRI‐Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate‐Cancer Diagnosis , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.
[2] M. Parmar,et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confi rmatory study , 2018 .
[3] P. J. Donker,et al. Impotence Following Radical Prostatectomy: Insight into Etiology and Prevention. , 1982, The Journal of urology.
[4] M. Terris,et al. Long-term oncological outcomes of apical positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy in the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital cohort , 2016, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases.
[5] J Alfred Witjes,et al. Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis. , 2016, European urology.
[6] F. Montorsi,et al. Evaluation of positive surgical margins in patients undergoing robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy according to preoperative risk groups. , 2016, Urologic oncology.
[7] Katarzyna J Macura,et al. Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 Guidelines for Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Recommendations for Use. , 2016, European urology.
[8] A. Costello,et al. Preservation of the neurovascular bundles is associated with improved time to continence after radical prostatectomy but not long-term continence rates: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2015, European urology.
[9] A. Svindland,et al. Does preoperative magnetic resonance imaging reduce the rate of positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy in a randomised clinical trial? , 2015, European urology.
[10] T. Ahlering,et al. Surgical margin length and location affect recurrence rates after robotic prostatectomy. , 2015, Urologic oncology.
[11] L. Egevad,et al. The impact of length and location of positive margins in predicting biochemical recurrence after robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy with a minimum follow‐up of 5 years , 2015, BJU international.
[12] J. Nesland,et al. The Length of a Positive Surgical Margin Is of Prognostic Significance in Patients with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Treated with Radical Prostatectomy , 2014, Urologia Internationalis.
[13] B. Park,et al. Influence of magnetic resonance imaging in the decision to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles at robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. , 2014, The Journal of urology.
[14] Markus Graefen,et al. Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and contemporary update. , 2014, European urology.
[15] C. Claussen,et al. Accuracy of preoperative endorectal MRI in predicting extracapsular extension and influence on neurovascular bundle sparing in radical prostatectomy , 2013, World Journal of Urology.
[16] Fang-Ming Deng,et al. Prostate cancer: multiparametric MRI for index lesion localization--a multiple-reader study. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.
[17] A. Haese*,et al. Neurovascular structure-adjacent frozen-section examination (NeuroSAFE) increases nerve-sparing frequency and reduces positive surgical margins in open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience after 11,069 consecutive patients. , 2012, European urology.
[18] F. Beuvon,et al. Endorectal 3D T2-weighted 1mm-slice thickness MRI for prostate cancer staging at 1.5Tesla: should we reconsider the indirects signs of extracapsular extension according to the D'Amico tumor risk criteria? , 2012, European journal of radiology.
[19] J. Fütterer,et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 , 2012, European Radiology.
[20] Liang Cheng,et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 5: surgical margins , 2011, Modern Pathology.
[21] Rodolfo Montironi,et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 3: extraprostatic extension, lymphovascular invasion and locally advanced disease , 2011, Modern Pathology.
[22] P. Choyke,et al. Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection--histopathologic correlation. , 2010, Radiology.
[23] Madeleine Moussa,et al. Interobserver Variability Between Expert Urologic Pathologists for Extraprostatic Extension and Surgical Margin Status in Radical Prostatectomy Specimens , 2008, The American journal of surgical pathology.
[24] L. Collette,et al. Impact of pathology review of stage and margin status of radical prostatectomy specimens (EORTC trial 22911) , 2006, Virchows Archiv.
[25] T. Scheenen,et al. Prostate cancer: local staging at 3-T endorectal MR imaging--early experience. , 2006, Radiology.
[26] L. Egevad,et al. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma , 2005, The American journal of surgical pathology.
[27] D. Mitchell,et al. Prostate carcinoma: assessment of diagnostic criteria for capsular penetration on endorectal coil MR images. , 1994, Radiology.
[28] P. J. Donker,et al. Impotence following radical prostatectomy: insight into etiology and prevention. , 1982, The Journal of urology.