Literature DB >> 20180058

[Imaging modalities for primary diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer].

U G Mueller-Lisse1, K Miller.   

Abstract

The new S3 guideline on prostate cancer includes imaging modalities applied for early detection, primary diagnosis, and staging of prostate cancer. Detection and primary diagnosis are based on digital rectal examination, serum PSA levels, and prostate biopsy. Among the imaging modalities, MRI shows the highest test quality parameters. Although MRI cannot replace biopsy to prove prostate cancer, its high negative predictive value can help to reduce the number of subsequent biopsies after negative prostate biopsy. For T-staging, MRI also demonstrates the highest test quality parameters. Its clinical application is limited, since therapeutic consequences are restricted. Due to its high specificity, MRI can save unnecessary pelvic lymph node dissections in patients at high risk for lymph node metastasis (N-staging). Risk-adjusted bone scans, complemented by additional radiological examinations if necessary, remain the standard to assess hematogenous metastasis (M staging).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20180058     DOI: 10.1007/s00120-010-2235-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urologe A        ISSN: 0340-2592            Impact factor:   0.639


  37 in total

1.  Per-sextant localization and staging of prostate cancer: correlation of imaging findings with whole-mount step section histopathology.

Authors:  Anno Graser; Andreas Heuck; Bernhard Sommer; Joerg Massmann; Juergen Scheidler; Maximillian Reiser; Ullrich Mueller-Lisse
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update.

Authors:  Ian Thompson; James Brantley Thrasher; Gunnar Aus; Arthur L Burnett; Edith D Canby-Hagino; Michael S Cookson; Anthony V D'Amico; Roger R Dmochowski; David T Eton; Jeffrey D Forman; S Larry Goldenberg; Javier Hernandez; Celestia S Higano; Stephen R Kraus; Judd W Moul; Catherine M Tangen
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms.

Authors:  Liang Wang; Hedvig Hricak; Michael W Kattan; Hui-Ni Chen; Peter T Scardino; Kentaro Kuroiwa
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-12-12       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stephen J Freedland; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Leslie A Mangold; Mario Eisenberger; Frederick J Dorey; Patrick C Walsh; Alan W Partin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-07-27       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Is a digital rectal examination necessary in the diagnosis and clinical staging of early prostate cancer?

Authors:  Joe Philip; Subhajit Dutta Roy; Mohammed Ballal; Christopher S Foster; Pradip Javlé
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  Transrectal ultrasound versus digital rectal examination for the staging of carcinoma of the prostate: results of a prospective, multi-institutional trial.

Authors:  J A Smith; P T Scardino; M I Resnick; A D Hernandez; S C Rose; M J Egger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Combined endorectal and phased-array MRI in the prediction of pelvic lymph node metastasis in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Liang Wang; Hedvig Hricak; Michael W Kattan; Lawrence H Schwartz; Steven C Eberhardt; Hui-Ni Chen; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 8.  Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective.

Authors:  Hedvig Hricak; Peter L Choyke; Steven C Eberhardt; Steven A Leibel; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Intermixed normal tissue within prostate cancer: effect on MR imaging measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient and T2--sparse versus dense cancers.

Authors:  Deanna L Langer; Theodorus H van der Kwast; Andrew J Evans; Laibao Sun; Martin J Yaffe; John Trachtenberg; Masoom A Haider
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 10.  [1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the prostate].

Authors:  U G Mueller-Lisse; M Scherr
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 0.635

View more
  3 in total

1.  [The impact of ultrasound in urology].

Authors:  G Schöppler; J Heinzelbecker; H J Michaely; D Dinter; D-A Clevert; A E Pelzer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  [Diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate].

Authors:  U G Mueller-Lisse; U L Mueller-Lisse; P Zamecnik; H-P W Schlemmer; M K Scherr
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  The value of prostate MRI with endorectal coil in detecting seminal vesicle involvement in patients with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mahyar Ghafoori; Manijeh Alavi; Madjid Shakiba; Kamal Hoseini
Journal:  Iran J Radiol       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 0.212

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.