Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: What Urologists Need to Know. Part 1: Acquisition.

[1]  M. Rovers,et al.  High Diagnostic Performance of Short Magnetic Resonance Imaging Protocols for Prostate Cancer Detection in Biopsy-naïve Men: The Next Step in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Accessibility. , 2019, European urology.

[2]  D. Margolis,et al.  Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. , 2019, European urology.

[3]  M. Leapman,et al.  Role of Core Number and Location in Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy. , 2019, European urology.

[4]  D. Margolis,et al.  PI-RADS Steering Committee: The PI-RADS Multiparametric MRI and MRI-directed Biopsy Pathway. , 2019, Radiology.

[5]  Ewout W Steyerberg,et al.  Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. , 2019, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[6]  J. Barentsz,et al.  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. , 2019, European urology.

[7]  Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa,et al.  Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naïve Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study. , 2019, European urology.

[8]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI-RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions. , 2019, European urology.

[9]  M. Stern,et al.  Which Patients with Negative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Can Safely Avoid Biopsy for Prostate Cancer? , 2019, The Journal of urology.

[10]  M. Haider,et al.  Value of Increasing Biopsy Cores per Target with Cognitive MRI-targeted Transrectal US Prostate Biopsy. , 2019, Radiology.

[11]  D. Nieboer,et al.  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. , 2020, European urology.

[12]  D. Lu,et al.  Three Tesla Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Comparison of Performance with and without Endorectal Coil for Prostate Cancer Detection, PI-RADS™ version 2 Category and Staging with Whole Mount Histopathology Correlation. , 2019, The Journal of urology.

[13]  Laurent Lemaitre,et al.  Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. , 2019, The Lancet. Oncology.

[14]  Fernando Ide Yamauchi,et al.  Interobserver Agreement and Positivity of PI-RADS Version 2 Among Radiologists with Different Levels of Experience. , 2019, Academic radiology.

[15]  J. Futterer,et al.  Controversies in MR targeted biopsy: alone or combined, cognitive versus software-based fusion, transrectal versus transperineal approach? , 2019, World Journal of Urology.

[16]  Audrey Renson,et al.  Optimizing the Number of Cores Targeted During Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Fusion Target Biopsy. , 2018, European urology oncology.

[17]  P. Asbach,et al.  Validation of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for the Detection of Prostate Cancer , 2018, The Journal of urology.

[18]  Jeong Yeon Cho,et al.  Head-to-Head Comparison Between Biparametric and Multiparametric MRI for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. , 2018, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  F. Montorsi,et al.  Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: The European Association of Urology Position in 2018. , 2018, European urology.

[20]  F. Giganti,et al.  MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis: do we need to add standard sampling? A review of the last 5 years , 2018, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases.

[21]  P. Asbach,et al.  Primary magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion‐guided biopsy of the prostate , 2018, BJU international.

[22]  J. Fütterer,et al.  Positive pre-biopsy MRI: are systematic biopsies still useful in addition to targeted biopsies? , 2018, World Journal of Urology.

[23]  C. Catalano,et al.  Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer: What's Next? , 2018, European urology.

[24]  B. Hadaschik,et al.  Multicentre evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging supported transperineal prostate biopsy in biopsy‐naïve men with suspicion of prostate cancer , 2018, BJU international.

[25]  Tristan Barrett,et al.  National implementation of multi‐parametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection – recommendations from a UK consensus meeting , 2018, BJU international.

[26]  I. Balslev,et al.  Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men , 2018, JAMA network open.

[27]  Shigeru Kobayashi,et al.  Cancer detection rate of prebiopsy MRI with subsequent systematic and targeted biopsy are superior to non-targeting systematic biopsy without MRI in biopsy naïve patients: a retrospective cohort study , 2018, BMC Urology.

[28]  Prasad R. Shankar,et al.  Impact of Clinical History on Maximum PI-RADS Version 2 Score: A Six-Reader 120-Case Sham History Retrospective Evaluation. , 2018, Radiology.

[29]  D. Margolis,et al.  MRI‐Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate‐Cancer Diagnosis , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  I. Schoots.  MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions? , 2018, Translational andrology and urology.

[31]  M. Hauptmann,et al.  Gas-induced susceptibility artefacts on diffusion-weighted MRI of the rectum at 1.5 T - Effect of applying a micro-enema to improve image quality. , 2018, European journal of radiology.

[32]  A. Patterson,et al.  Effect of hyoscine butylbromide on prostate multiparametric MRI anatomical and functional image quality. , 2018, Clinical radiology.

[33]  C. Tempany,et al.  Prostate MRI using an external phased array wearable pelvic coil at 3T: comparison with an endorectal coil , 2018, Abdominal Radiology.

[34]  Marta O. Soares,et al.  Optimising the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in the Era of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis Based on the Prostate MR Imaging Study (PROMIS) , 2018, European urology.

[35]  Nikolaos Dikaios,et al.  Characterizing indeterminate (Likert-score 3/5) peripheral zone prostate lesions with PSA density, PI-RADS scoring and qualitative descriptors on multiparametric MRI. , 2017, The British journal of radiology.

[36]  A. Sidana,et al.  Risk of Upgrading from Prostate Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy Pathology—Does Saturation Biopsy of Index Lesion during Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging‐Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Help? , 2017, The Journal of urology.

[37]  J. Weinreb,et al.  Risk of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Associated With Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 (Equivocal) Lesions Identified on Multiparametric Prostate MRI. , 2017, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[38]  P. Albers,et al.  Risk Stratification of Equivocal Lesions on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate , 2017, The Journal of urology.

[39]  Maarten de Rooij,et al.  Elastic Versus Rigid Image Registration in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. , 2016, European urology focus.

[40]  T. Smith,et al.  Accuracy of high b-value diffusion-weighted MRI for prostate cancer detection: a meta-analysis , 2018, Acta radiologica.

[41]  U. Nagele,et al.  Retrospective analysis of the development of PIRADS 3 lesions over time: when is a follow-up MRI reasonable? , 2018, World Journal of Urology.

[42]  Y. Kaji,et al.  Significant changes of T2 value in the peripheral zone and seminal vesicles after ejaculation , 2018, European Radiology.

[43]  R. Fusco,et al.  A systematic review on multiparametric MR imaging in prostate cancer detection , 2017, Infectious Agents and Cancer.

[44]  Yu Xuan Kitzing,et al.  An update of pitfalls in prostate mpMRI: a practical approach through the lens of PI-RADS v. 2 guidelines , 2017, Insights into Imaging.

[45]  H. Huisman,et al.  Retrospective comparison of direct in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy and fusion-guided biopsy in patients with MRI lesions which are likely or highly likely to be clinically significant prostate cancer , 2017, World Journal of Urology.

[46]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Prospective Evaluation of PI‐RADS™ Version 2 Using the International Society of Urological Pathology Prostate Cancer Grade Group System , 2017, The Journal of urology.

[47]  Frank Chen,et al.  Application of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADS v2): Interobserver Agreement and Positive Predictive Value for Localization of Intermediate- and High-Grade Prostate Cancers on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging. , 2017, Academic radiology.

[48]  D. Margolis,et al.  Risk Stratification Among Men With Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 Category 3 Transition Zone Lesions: Is Biopsy Always Necessary? , 2017, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[49]  Martin J. Graves,et al.  MRI from Picture to Proton , 2017 .

[50]  Seung Hyup Kim,et al.  Diagnostic Performance of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 for Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Meta-analysis. , 2017, European urology.

[51]  H. G. van der Poel,et al.  What Is the Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Prostate Cancer at Biopsy? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer Guidelines Panel. , 2017, European urology.

[52]  J. Wason,et al.  The longitudinal effect of ejaculation on seminal vesicle fluid volume and whole-prostate ADC as measured on prostate MRI , 2017, European Radiology.

[53]  G. Cattaneo,et al.  Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance/Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy: Number and Spatial Distribution of Cores for Better Index Tumor Detection and Characterization , 2017, The Journal of urology.

[54]  C. Tempany,et al.  Interreader Agreement of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 Using an In-Bore MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy Cohort: A Single Institution's Initial Experience. , 2017, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[55]  Y. Huan,et al.  A meta-analysis of use of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 (PI-RADS V2) with multiparametric MR imaging for the detection of prostate cancer , 2017, European Radiology.

[56]  Thomaz R. Mostardeiro,et al.  Accuracy and Interobserver Agreement for Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, Version 2, for the Characterization of Lesions Identified on Multiparametric MRI of the Prostate. , 2017, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[57]  Jurgen J Fütterer,et al.  Why and Where do We Miss Significant Prostate Cancer with Multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging followed by Magnetic Resonance-guided and Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naïve Men? , 2017, European urology.

[58]  Vikas Gulani,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of MR Imaging-guided Strategies for Detection of Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men. , 2017, Radiology.

[59]  A. Patterson,et al.  Evaluating the effect of rectal distension on prostate multiparametric MRI image quality. , 2017, European journal of radiology.

[60]  P. Albers,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate at 1.5 versus 3.0T: A prospective comparison study of image quality. , 2017, European journal of radiology.

[61]  L. Hooft,et al.  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? , 2017, European urology.

[62]  Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa,et al.  Results of Targeted Biopsy in Men with Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesions Classified Equivocal, Likely or Highly Likely to Be Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. , 2017, European urology.

[63]  M. Parmar,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confi rmatory study , 2018 .

[64]  Jurgen J Fütterer,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Imaging-Guided Prostate Biopsy Techniques: Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound, Direct In-Bore MRI, and Image Fusion. , 2017, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[65]  A. Sidana,et al.  Missing the Mark: Prostate Cancer Upgrading by Systematic Biopsy over Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy , 2017, The Journal of urology.

[66]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: A multireader study , 2017, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[67]  T. Miyagawa,et al.  Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI‐RADS) score and prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naïve patients , 2017, BJU international.

[68]  Anne Vral,et al.  Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of normal, benign and malignant conditions in the prostate , 2017, European Radiology.

[69]  D. Margolis,et al.  Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Patients with a Prior Negative Biopsy: A Consensus Statement by AUA and SAR. , 2016, The Journal of urology.

[70]  M. Roethke,et al.  Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and MRI-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy for Index Tumor Detection: Correlation with Radical Prostatectomy Specimen. , 2016, European urology.

[71]  M. Haider,et al.  Determination of the Association Between T2-weighted MRI and Gleason Sub-pattern: A Proof of Principle Study. , 2016, Academic radiology.

[72]  P. Choyke,et al.  Does Abstinence From Ejaculation Before Prostate MRI Improve Evaluation of the Seminal Vesicles? , 2016, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[73]  J. Kaouk,et al.  A Critical Analysis of the Current Knowledge of Surgical Anatomy of the Prostate Related to Optimisation of Cancer Control and Preservation of Continence and Erection in Candidates for Radical Prostatectomy: An Update. , 2016, European urology.

[74]  J. Bomers,et al.  Feasibility of a 2nd generation MR-compatible manipulator for transrectal prostate biopsy guidance , 2016, European Radiology.

[75]  J. Mongan,et al.  Beyond Prostate Adenocarcinoma: Expanding the Differential Diagnosis in Prostate Pathologic Conditions. , 2016, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[76]  A. Zitella,et al.  Prostate Cancer Detection Rate with Koelis Fusion Biopsies versus Cognitive Biopsies: A Comparative Study , 2016, Urologia Internationalis.

[77]  Bernd Hamm,et al.  T2- and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3T for the detection of prostate cancer with and without endorectal coil: An intraindividual comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance. , 2016, European journal of radiology.

[78]  H. Huisman,et al.  MR-targeted TRUS prostate biopsy using local reference augmentation: initial experience , 2016, International Urology and Nephrology.

[79]  Adam T Froemming,et al.  Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists. , 2016, Radiology.

[80]  Saila Kauppila,et al.  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. , 2016, European urology.

[81]  P. Mulders,et al.  The value of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography (MRI/US)‐fusion biopsy platforms in prostate cancer detection: a systematic review , 2016, BJU international.

[82]  M. Esposito,et al.  Quality assurance multicenter comparison of different MR scanners for quantitative diffusion‐weighted imaging , 2016, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[83]  Tristan Barrett,et al.  Defining the learning curve for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate using MRI‐transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion‐guided transperineal prostate biopsies as a validation tool , 2016, BJU international.

[84]  S. Meyers,et al.  Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Recurrent Prostate Cancer , 2016, Journal of clinical imaging science.

[85]  D. Margolis,et al.  PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. , 2016, European urology.

[86]  Aytekin Oto,et al.  Benign Conditions That Mimic Prostate Carcinoma: MR Imaging Features with Histopathologic Correlation. , 2016, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[87]  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.

[88]  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.

[89]  Maria A Schmidt,et al.  Radiotherapy planning using MRI , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[90]  H. Ahmed,et al.  Visually directed vs. software-based targeted biopsy compared to transperineal template mapping biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. , 2015, Urologic oncology.

[91]  Adam T Froemming,et al.  Detection of Local Recurrence of Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy Using Endorectal Coil MRI at 3 T: Addition of DWI and Dynamic Contrast Enhancement to T2-Weighted MRI. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[92]  J. Fütterer,et al.  Pitfalls in Interpreting mp-MRI of the Prostate: A Pictorial Review with Pathologic Correlation , 2015, Insights into Imaging.

[93]  W. Shabana,et al.  Does a cleansing enema improve image quality of 3T surface coil multiparametric prostate MRI? , 2015, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[94]  D. Nieboer,et al.  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. , 2015, European urology.

[95]  Lars Boesen,et al.  Apparent diffusion coefficient ratio correlates significantly with prostate cancer gleason score at final pathology , 2015, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[96]  Felix Nensa,et al.  High and ultra-high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer: a quantitative analysis , 2015, Acta radiologica.

[97]  E. Merkle,et al.  Computed high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging improves lesion contrast and conspicuity in prostate cancer , 2015, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Disease.

[98]  Jin Tae Kwak,et al.  Is Visual Registration Equivalent to Semiautomated Registration in Prostate Biopsy? , 2015, BioMed research international.

[99]  P. Choyke,et al.  Diagnostic value of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an adjunct to prostate‐specific antigen (PSA)‐based detection of prostate cancer in men without prior biopsies , 2015, BJU international.

[100]  Julien Cohen-Adad,et al.  The impact of gradient strength on in vivo diffusion MRI estimates of axon diameter , 2015, NeuroImage.

[101]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. , 2015, JAMA.

[102]  A. Fenster,et al.  Evaluation of MRI-TRUS fusion versus cognitive registration accuracy for MRI-targeted, TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[103]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies , 2014, BJU international.

[104]  Maarten de Rooij,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective. , 2014, European urology.

[105]  M. Stifelman,et al.  A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-ultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial. , 2014, European urology.

[106]  Michael Bock,et al.  Automated real-time needle-guide tracking for fast 3-T MR-guided transrectal prostate biopsy: a feasibility study. , 2014, Radiology.

[107]  D. Sung,et al.  The optimal timing of post-prostate biopsy magnetic resonance imaging to guide nerve-sparing surgery , 2014, Asian journal of andrology.

[108]  M Emberton,et al.  Performance of multiparametric MRI in men at risk of prostate cancer before the first biopsy: a paired validating cohort study using template prostate mapping biopsies as the reference standard , 2013, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Disease.

[109]  Andrew B Rosenkrantz,et al.  Radiologist, be aware: ten pitfalls that confound the interpretation of multiparametric prostate MRI. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[110]  Kingshuk Roy Choudhury,et al.  Detection of prostate cancer with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI): effect of dedicated reader education on accuracy and confidence of index and anterior cancer diagnosis , 2014, Abdominal Imaging.

[111]  Heinz-Peter Schlemmer,et al.  Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. , 2013, The Journal of urology.

[112]  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.

[113]  Xavier Leroy,et al.  Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy--prospective multicenter study. , 2013, Radiology.

[114]  Christiaan G Overduin,et al.  MRI-Guided Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Results , 2013, Current Urology Reports.

[115]  Naira Muradyan,et al.  Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and prostate cancer detection: comparison of random and targeted biopsies. , 2013, The Journal of urology.

[116]  Shyam Natarajan,et al.  MRI–ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy , 2013, Current opinion in urology.

[117]  J. Babb,et al.  Impact of delay after biopsy and post-biopsy haemorrhage on prostate cancer tumour detection using multi-parametric MRI: a multi-reader study. , 2012, Clinical radiology.

[118]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Overview of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[119]  Eduard Baco,et al.  MRI and ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy using soft image fusion. , 2012, Anticancer research.

[120]  H. Hricak,et al.  Value of the hemorrhage exclusion sign on T1-weighted prostate MR images for the detection of prostate cancer. , 2012, Radiology.

[121]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. , 2012, European urology.

[122]  J. Fütterer,et al.  ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 , 2012, European Radiology.

[123]  Georgios Sakas,et al.  A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[124]  B. K. Park,et al.  Prospective evaluation of 3-T MRI performed before initial transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with high prostate-specific antigen and no previous biopsy. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[125]  G. Haber,et al.  Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging‐targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection , 2011, BJU international.

[126]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. , 2011, Radiology.

[127]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? , 2011, Radiology.

[128]  Aytekin Oto,et al.  Prostate cancer: differentiation of central gland cancer from benign prostatic hyperplasia by using diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. , 2010, Radiology.

[129]  Olaf Dietrich,et al.  Technical aspects of MR diffusion imaging of the body. , 2010, European journal of radiology.

[130]  A. Evans,et al.  Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features. , 2010, Radiology.

[131]  A. Qayyum.  Diffusion-weighted imaging in the abdomen and pelvis: concepts and applications. , 2009, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[132]  Namkug Kim,et al.  Apparent diffusion coefficient: Prostate cancer versus noncancerous tissue according to anatomical region , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[133]  T. Sone,et al.  Age‐related and zonal anatomical changes of apparent diffusion coefficient values in normal human prostatic tissues , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[134]  Y. Liu,et al.  Diffusion-weighted imaging in normal prostate and differential diagnosis of prostate diseases , 2008, Abdominal Imaging.

[135]  Peter L Choyke,et al.  Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective. , 2007, Radiology.

[136]  Evis Sala,et al.  Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. , 2006, Radiology.

[137]  M Bolla,et al.  EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. , 2001, European urology.

[138]  F. Shellock,et al.  MR procedures: biologic effects, safety, and patient care. , 2004, Radiology.

[139]  Jacob Sosna,et al.  MR imaging of the prostate at 3 Tesla: comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 Tesla. , 2004, Academic radiology.

[140]  R. Bammer.  Basic principles of diffusion-weighted imaging. , 2003, European journal of radiology.

[141]  H. Huisman,et al.  Accurate estimation of pharmacokinetic contrast‐enhanced dynamic MRI parameters of the prostate , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[142]  D. Johnston,et al.  Detailed mapping of prostate carcinoma foci , 2000, Cancer.

[143]  A R Padhani,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer: comparison of image quality using endorectal and pelvic phased array coils. , 1998, Clinical radiology.

[144]  Carolyn Kaut,et al.  MRI in Practice , 1993 .

[145]  T. Stamey,et al.  Zonal Distribution of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma: Correlation with Histologic Pattern and Direction of Spread , 1988, The American journal of surgical pathology.