Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate at 1.5 versus 3.0T: A prospective comparison study of image quality.
暂无分享,去创建一个
P. Albers | D. Blondin | G. Antoch | H. Wittsack | M. Quentin | C. Arsov | L. Schimmöller | R. Rabenalt | T. Ullrich | C. Oelers | F. Dietzel | L. Sawicki
[1] M. Parmar,et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confi rmatory study , 2018 .
[2] S. Taneja. Re: 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. , 2016, The Journal of urology.
[3] D. Margolis,et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. , 2016, European urology.
[4] N. Lumen,et al. What kind of prostate cancers do we miss on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? , 2016, European Radiology.
[5] J. Fütterer,et al. Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature. , 2015, European urology.
[6] P. Albers,et al. The use of targeted MR-guided prostate biopsy reduces the risk of Gleason upgrading on radical prostatectomy , 2015, Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology.
[7] M. Knopp,et al. Performance comparison of 1.5-T endorectal coil MRI with 3.0-T nonendorectal coil MRI in patients with prostate cancer. , 2015, Academic radiology.
[8] P. Albers,et al. Predictive power of the ESUR scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis verified with targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. , 2014, European journal of radiology.
[9] P. Albers,et al. Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore prostate biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in biopsy naïve men with elevated prostate specific antigen. , 2014, The Journal of urology.
[10] D. Moses,et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study. , 2014, The Journal of urology.
[11] P. Albers,et al. MR-sequences for prostate cancer diagnostics: validation based on the PI-RADS scoring system and targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy , 2014, European Radiology.
[12] T. Scheenen,et al. Image quality and cancer visibility of T2-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the prostate at 7 Tesla , 2014, European Radiology.
[13] T. Scheenen,et al. Role of high‐field MR in studies of localized prostate cancer , 2014, NMR in biomedicine.
[14] M. Haider,et al. The expanding role of MRI in prostate cancer. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.
[15] H. Hricak,et al. Image artifacts on prostate diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: trade-offs at 1.5 Tesla and 3.0 Tesla. , 2013, Academic radiology.
[16] S. Schoenberg,et al. Interscanner Comparison of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in Prostate Cancer: 1.5 Versus 3 T MRI , 2013, Investigative radiology.
[17] P. Albers,et al. Increased signal intensity of prostate lesions on high b-value diffusion-weighted images as a predictive sign of malignancy , 2013, European Radiology.
[18] J. Fütterer,et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 , 2012, European Radiology.
[19] R. Semelka,et al. Quantitative and qualitative comparison of 1.5 and 3.0 tesla MRI in patients with chronic liver diseases , 2009, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.
[20] R. Lenkinski,et al. Body MR imaging at 3.0 T: understanding the opportunities and challenges. , 2007, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.
[21] E. Merkle,et al. A review of MR physics: 3T versus 1.5T. , 2007, Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America.
[22] B. K. Park,et al. Comparison of Phased-Array 3.0-T and Endorectal 1.5-T Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Local Staging Accuracy for Prostate Cancer , 2007, Journal of computer assisted tomography.
[23] D. Beyersdorff,et al. MRI of prostate cancer at 1.5 and 3.0 T: comparison of image quality in tumor detection and staging. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.
[24] 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.
[25] F. Coakley,et al. MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer. , 2004, Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America.
[26] J. R. Landis,et al. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.