Literature DB >> 26704284

[Prostate biopsy: Procedure in the clinical routine].

T Enzmann1, T Tokas2, K Korte2, M Ritter3, P Hammerer4, L Franzaring5, H Heynemann6, H-W Gottfried7, H Bertermann8, M Meyer-Schwickerath9, B Wirth10, A Pelzer11, T Loch12.   

Abstract

Over the last decade there has been a 25% decrease in the mortality rates for prostate cancer. The reasons for this significant decrease are most likely associated with the application of urological screening tests. The main tools for early detection are currently increased public awareness of the disease, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided topographically assignable biopsy sampling. Together with the histopathological results these features provide essential information for risk stratification, diagnostics and therapy decisions. The evolution of prostate biopsy techniques as well as the use of PSA testing has led to an increased identification of asymptomatic men, where further clarification is necessary. Significant efforts and increased clinical research focus on determining the appropriate indications for a prostate biopsy and the optimal technique to achieve better detection rates. The most widely used imaging modality for the prostate is TRUS; however, there are no clearly defined standards for the clinical approach for each individual biopsy procedure, dealing with continuous technical optimization and in particular the developments in imaging. In this review the current principles, techniques, new approaches and instrumentation of prostate biopsy imaging control are presented within the framework of the structured educational approach.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biopsy; Diagnostic imaging; Fusion; Prostate cancer; Transrectal ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26704284     DOI: 10.1007/s00120-015-4025-7

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


  26 in total

1.  A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion.

Authors:  Boris A Hadaschik; Timur H Kuru; Corina Tulea; Philip Rieker; Ionel V Popeneciu; Tobias Simpfendörfer; Johannes Huber; Pawel Zogal; Dogu Teber; Sascha Pahernik; Matthias Roethke; Patrik Zamecnik; Wilfried Roth; Georgios Sakas; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Markus Hohenfellner
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Real-time sonoelastography compared to magnetic resonance imaging using four different modalities at 3.0 T in the detection of prostate cancer: strength and weaknesses.

Authors:  Alexandre E Pelzer; Julia Heinzelbecker; Christel Weiß; Dominik Frühbauer; Anja M Weidner; Matthias Kirchner; Philipp Stroebel; Stephan O Schoenberg; Dietmar J Dinter
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 3.  Innovations in diagnostic imaging of localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Karl Pummer; Malte Rieken; Herbert Augustin; Thomas Gutschi; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program.

Authors:  René Raaijmakers; Wim J Kirkels; Monique J Roobol; Mark F Wildhagen; Fritz H Schrder
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: random sextant versus biopsies of sono-morphologically suspicious lesions.

Authors:  Tillmann Loch; Ursula Eppelmann; Jan Lehmann; Bernd Wullich; Annemie Loch; Michael Stöckle
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-12-01       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Are transition zone biopsies still necessary to improve prostate cancer detection? Results from the tyrol screening project.

Authors:  Alexandre E Pelzer; Jasmin Bektic; Andreas P Berger; Ethan J Halpern; Florian Koppelstätter; Andrea Klauser; Peter Rehder; Wolfgang Horninger; Georg Bartsch; Ferdinand Frauscher
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Prostate cancer detection on transrectal ultrasonography-guided random biopsy despite negative real-time magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion-guided targeted biopsy: reasons for targeted biopsy failure.

Authors:  Hannes Cash; Karsten Günzel; Andreas Maxeiner; Carsten Stephan; Thomas Fischer; Tahir Durmus; Kurt Miller; Patrick Asbach; Matthias Haas; Carsten Kempkensteffen
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Three-dimensional prostate mapping biopsy has a potentially significant impact on prostate cancer management.

Authors:  Gary Onik; Matthew Miessau; David G Bostwick
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-08-03       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Computerized transrectal ultrasound (C-TRUS) of the prostate: detection of cancer in patients with multiple negative systematic random biopsies.

Authors:  Tillmann Loch
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-08-11       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Novel contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Martijn Smeenge; Massimo Mischi; M Pilar Laguna Pes; Jean J M C H de la Rosette; Hessel Wijkstra
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.