Диссертация (1140798), страница 22
Текст из файла (страница 22)
45-48.30.Akpınar H. Doppler ultrasonography-guided pelvic plexus block beforesystematic needle biopsy of the prostate: a prospective randomized study //Urology. – 2009. – Vol. 74. – № 2. – P. 267-271.31.Akten, A.O. Artificial neural network: is it free of problems? / A.O. Akten // BJUInt. – 2008. – Vol. 102, № 7. – P.
902-902.32.Alavi, A.S. Local anesthesia for ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a prospectiverandomized trial comparing 2 methods / A.S. Alavi // J. Urol. – 2001. – Vol. 166,– № 4. – P. 1343-1345.33.Alshalalfa, M. Low PCA3 expression is a marker of poor differentiation inlocalized prostate tumors: exploratory analysis from 12,076 patients. / M.Alshalalfa // Oncotarget.
– 2017. – № 8. – P. 50804–5081334.Anagnostou, T. Artificial neural networks for decision-making in urologiconcology / T. Anagnostou // Eur. Urol. – 2003. – Vol. 43, № 6. – P. 596-603.35.Anastasi, G. Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy: Threedifferent types of local anesthesia / G. Anastasi // Arch. Ital. Urol. Androl. –2016. – Vol. 88, № 4. – P. 308-310.36.Ankerst, D.P. Evaluating the PCPT risk calculator in ten international biopsycohorts: results from the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group / D.P.
Ankerst //World J. Urol. – 2012. – Vol. 30, № 2. – P. 181-187.13237.Ankerst, D.P. Evaluating the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial High Gradeprostate cancer risk calculator in 10 international biopsy cohorts: results from theprostate biopsy collaborative group / D.P. Ankerst // World J. Urol. – 2014. –Vol. 32, № 1.
– P. 185-191.38.Ankerst, D.P. The impact of prostate volume, number of biopsy cores andAmerican Urological Association symptom score on the sensitivity of cancerdetection using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator / D.P. Ankerst// J. Urol. – 2013. – Vol. 190, № 1. – P.
70-76.39.Ankerst, D.P. Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator 2.0 for theprediction of low-vs high-grade prostate cancer / D.P. Ankerst // Urology. – 2014.– Vol. 83, № 6. – P. 1362-1368.40.Arneth, B.M. Clinical significance of measuring prostate-specific antigen / B.M.Arneth // Lab. Med. – 2009.
– Vol. 40, № 8. – P. 487-491.41.Babaian, R.J. Performance of a neural network in detecting prostate cancer in theprostate-specific antigen reflex range of 2.5 to 4.0 ng/mL / R.J. Babaian //Urology. – 2000. – Vol. 56, № 6. – P. 1000-1006.42.Bhindi, B. Impact of the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendationsagainst prostate specific antigen screening on prostate biopsy and cancerdetection rates / B. Bhindi // J. Urol. – 2015. – Vol. 193, № 5. – P. 1519-1524.43.Bjurlin, M.A. Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice:sampling, labeling and specimen processing / M.A. Bjurlin // J.
Urol. – 2013. –Vol. 189, № 6. – P. 2039-2046.44.Bjurlin, M.A. Standards for prostate biopsy / M.A. Bjurlin, S.S. Taneja // Curr.Opin. Urol. – 2014. – Vol. 24, № 2. – P. 155.45.Cam, K. Combined periprostatic and intraprostatic local anesthesia for prostatebiopsy: a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomized trial / K. Cam // J. Urol. –2008. – Vol. 180, № 1. – P.
141-145.46.Cantiello, F. Periprostatic nerve block (PNB) alone vs PNB combined with ananaesthetic‐myorelaxant agent cream for prostate biopsy: a prospective,133randomized double‐arm study / F. Cantiello // BJU Int. – 2009. – Vol. 103, № 9.– P. 1195-1198.47.Catalona, W.J. Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostatespecific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: results of a multicenterclinical trial of 6,630 men / W.J. Catalona // J.
Urol. – 1994. – Vol. 151, № 5. – P.1283-1290.48.Cevik, I. Lack of effect of intrarectal lidocaine for pain control during transrectalprostate biopsy: a randomized prospective study / I. Cevik // Eur. Urol. – 2002. –Vol. 42, № 3. – P. 217-220.49.Ceylan, C. Comparison of 8, 10, 12, 16, 20 cores prostate biopsies indetermination of prostate cancer and importance of prostate volume / C.
Ceylan //Canad. Urol. Assoc. J. – 2014. – Vol. 8, № 1-2. – P. 81-85.50.Chevli, K.K. Urinary PCA3 as a predictor of prostate cancer in a cohort of 3,073men undergoing initial prostate biopsy / K.K. Chevli // J. Urol. – 2014. – Vol.191, № 6. – P. 1743-1748.51.Chun, F.K.H. A critical appraisal of logistic regression‐based nomograms,artificial neural networks, classification and regression‐tree models, look‐uptables and risk‐group stratification models for prostate cancer / F.K.H. Chun //BJU Int. – 2007. – Vol.
99, № 4. – P. 794-800.52.Chun, F.K.H. Initial biopsy outcome prediction—head-to-head comparison of alogistic regression-based nomogram versus artificial neural network / F.K.H.Chun // Eur. Urol. – 2007. – Vol. 51, № 5. – P. 1236-1243.53.Chun, F.K.H. Optimizing performance and interpretation of prostate biopsy: acritical analysis of the literature / F.K.H. Chun // Eur. Urol. – 2010. – Vol. 58, №6.
– P. 851-864.54.Cormio, L. Noninfiltrative anesthesia for transrectal prostate biopsy: Arandomized prospective study comparing lidocaine-prilocaine cream andlidocaine-ketorolac gel / L. Cormio // Urol. Oncol. – 2013. – Vol. 31, № 1. – P.68-73.13455.Cornud, F. Color Doppler-guided prostate biopsies in 591 patients with anelevated serum PSA level: impact on Gleason score for nonpalpable lesions / F.Cornud // Urology. – 1997. – Vol.
49, № 5. – P. 709-715.56.Dell'Atti, L. Prostatic calculi detected in peripheral zone of the gland during atransrectal ultrasound biopsy can be significant predictors of prostate cancer / L.Dell'Atti, A.B. Galosi, C. Ippolito // Arch. Ital.
Urol. Androl. – 2016. – Vol. 88,№ 4. – P. 304-307.57.Desgrandchamps, F. The rectal administration of lidocaine gel and tolerance oftransrectal ultrasonography‐guided biopsy of the prostate: a prospectiverandomized placebo‐controlled study / F. Desgrandchamps // BJU Int. – 1999. –Vol. 83, № 9. – P. 1007-1009.58.Deshpande, P.R. Patient-reported outcomes: a new era in clinical research / P.R.Deshpande // Perspectiv. Clin.
Res. – 2011. – Vol. 2, № 4. – P. 137.59.Djavan, B.O.B. Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1,2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? / B.O.B. Djavan // J. Urol. – 2001. – Vol. 166,№ 5. – P. 1679-1683.60.Djulbegovic, M. Screening for prostate cancer: systematic review and metaanalysis of randomised controlled trials / M. Djulbegovic // BMJ. – 2010. – Vol.341. – P. 4543.61.Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guideline: [Электронный ресурс].URL: https://www.auanet.org/common/pdf/education/clinical-guidance/Prostate Cancer-Detection.pdf (дата обращения: 08.01.2017).62.EAUGuidelinesonProstateCancer:[Электронныйресурс].URL:http://uroweb.org/guideline/prostate-cancer/ (дата обращения: 04.01.2017).63.Ecke, T.H.External validation of an artificial neural network and twonomograms for prostate cancer detection / T.H. Ecke // ISRN Urol.
– 2012. –2012. – P. 1-6.13564.Ezquer, A. Transrectal doppler ultrasound during prostate biopsy: Clinical utilityand limitations / A. Ezquer // Actas Urol. Españ. (English Edition). – 2015. – Vol.39, № 1. – P. 13-19.65.Galosi, A.B. Cognitive zonal fusion biopsy of the prostate: Original techniquebetween target and saturation / A.B. Galosi // Archiv.
Ital. Urol. Androl. – 2016. –Vol. 88, № 4. – P. 292-295.66.Grading (Gleason). PathologyOutlines.com website: [Электронный ресурс].URL:http://www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/prostategrading.html(датаобращения: 04.01.2017).67.Haffner, J. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparisonof magnetic resonance imaging‐targeted and systematic biopsy for significantprostate cancer detection / J. Haffner // BJU Int. – 2011. – Vol. 108, № 8b. – P.171-178.68.Haroon, N. Diclofenac suppository as a preemptive analgesia in ultrasoundguided biopsy of prostate: randomized controlled trial / N. Haroon // Urology.
–2015. – Vol. 86, № 4. – P. 682-685.69.Hendriks, R.J. Blood-based and urinary prostate cancer biomarkers: a review andcomparison of novel biomarkers for detection and treatment decisions / R.J.Hendriks, I.M. van Oort, J.A. Schalken // Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. – 2017. –№ 20. – P. 12–19.70.Ho, C.C.
Evaluation of power Doppler ultrasonography for prostate biopsy inmen with elevated serum prostate specific antigen levels / C.C. Ho // Clin Ther. –2012. – Vol. 163, № 3. – P. 211-214.71.Hodge, K.K. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectalcore biopsies of the prostate / K.K. Hodge // J. Urol. – 1989. – Vol. 142, № 1. –P.
71-74.72.Hoeks, C.M.A. Three-Tesla magnetic resonance–guided prostate biopsy in menwith increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random,systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant136prostate cancers / C.M.A. Hoeks // Eur.
Urol. – 2012. – Vol. 62, № 5. – P. 902909.73.Hricak, H. Anatomy and pathology of the male pelvis by magnetic resonanceimaging / H. Hricak // Am. J. Roentgenol. – 1983. – Vol. 141, № 6. – P. 11011110.74.Hu, J.C. Targeted prostate biopsy to select men for active surveillance: Do theEpstein criteria still apply? / J.C. Hu // Eur. Urol.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
