Clinical Value of Core Length in Contemporary Multicore Prostate Biopsy
暂无分享,去创建一个
S. Byun | G. Choe | S. Hong | H. Lee | S. Jeong | Sang Eun Lee | S. Hwang | Sangchul Lee
[1] F. Brimo,et al. Length of prostate biopsy cores: does it impact cancer detection? , 2013, The Canadian journal of urology.
[2] Zhihong Zhang,et al. Is an initial saturation prostate biopsy scheme better than an extended scheme for detection of prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2013, European urology.
[3] L. Salomon,et al. Pathologic findings in radical prostatectomy specimens from patients eligible for active surveillance with highly selective criteria: a multicenter study. , 2012, Urology.
[4] C. De Nunzio,et al. Prostate Biopsy Quality Is Independent of Needle Size: A Randomized Single-Center Prospective Study , 2012, Urologia Internationalis.
[5] C. Öbek,et al. Core length in prostate biopsy: size matters. , 2012, The Journal of urology.
[6] A. Partin,et al. Radical prostatectomy outcome in men 65 years old or older with low risk prostate cancer. , 2012, The Journal of urology.
[7] M. Soloway,et al. Clinically significant Gleason sum upgrade , 2012, Cancer.
[8] Misop Han,et al. Predicting 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality after radical prostatectomy. , 2011, The Journal of urology.
[9] F. Montorsi,et al. Optimizing performance and interpretation of prostate biopsy: a critical analysis of the literature. , 2010, European urology.
[10] Ö. Akdemir,et al. Sixteen gauge needles improve specimen quality but not cancer detection rate in transrectal ultrasound-guided 10-core prostate biopsies , 2008, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases.
[11] Jean-Jacques Patard,et al. Extended 21-sample needle biopsy protocol for diagnosis of prostate cancer in 1000 consecutive patients. , 2007, European urology.
[12] John T. Wei,et al. Incidence of initial local therapy among men with lower-risk prostate cancer in the United States. , 2006, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
[13] M. Pea,et al. Needle core length is a quality indicator of systematic transperineal prostate biopsy. , 2006, European urology.
[14] Susanne Hempel,et al. Diagnostic value of systematic biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate cancer: a systematic review. , 2006, The Journal of urology.
[15] P. Walsh,et al. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. , 2005, The Journal of urology.
[16] H. Ozen,et al. Can we obtain better specimens with an end-cutting prostatic biopsy device? , 2005, European urology.
[17] T. H. van der Kwast,et al. Handling and pathology reporting of prostate biopsies. , 2004, European urology.
[18] Rodolfo Montironi,et al. Handling and pathology reporting of radical prostatectomy specimens. , 2003, European urology.
[19] T. H. van der Kwast,et al. Guidelines for processing and reporting of prostatic needle biopsies , 2003, Journal of clinical pathology.
[20] A. Billis. Needle core length in sextant biopsy influences prostate cancer detection rate. , 2002, International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology.
[21] G. Bartsch,et al. Diagnostic effect of an improved preembedding method of prostate needle biopsy specimens. , 2000, Human pathology.
[22] P. Walsh,et al. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. , 1994, JAMA.
[23] Timothy J Wilt,et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.
[24] C. Roehrborn,et al. Using biopsy to detect prostate cancer. , 2008, Reviews in urology.