Keywords:
Genital / Reproductive system male, Oncology, Pelvis, MR, MR-Diffusion/Perfusion, Biopsy, Cancer
Authors:
N. Matinyan1, M. Cherkashin2, V. Kuplevatsky2, N. Berezina2, D. I. Kuplevatskaya2, D. Sahakyan3; 1Yerevan, Ye/AM, 2Saint Petersburg/RU, 3Yerevan/AM
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2019/C-2622
References
1) Weinreb JC et al (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging-reporting and data system: 2015,
version 2.
Eur Urol 69(1):16–40
2)Venderink W et al (2017) Results of targeted biopsy in men with magnetic resonance imaging lesions classified equivocal,
likely or highly likely to be clinically significant prostate cancer.
Eur Urol 73(3):353–360
3)Kasivisvanathan V et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis.
New Engl J Med 378(19):1767–1777
4)Rhudd A, McDonald J, Emberton M, Kasivisvanathan V.
The role of the multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve men.
Curr Opin Urol 2017;27:488-494.
5)Wegelin O et al (2017) 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? Eur Urol 71(4):517–531
6)Overduin CG,
Fütterer JJ,
Barentsz JO (2013) MRI-guided biopsy for prostate cancer detection: a systematic review of current clinical results.
Curr Urol Rep 14(3):209–213