Диссертация (1140798), страница 24
Текст из файла (страница 24)
349-354.120.Novis, M.I. Clinically low-risk prostate cancer: evaluation with transrectaldoppler ultrasound and functional magnetic resonance imaging / M.I. Novis //Clinics. – 2011. – Vol. 66, № 1. – P. 27-34.121.Oberlin, D.T. Diagnostic value of guided biopsies: fusion and cognitive-registration magnetic resonance imaging versus conventional ultrasound biopsyof the prostate / D.T. Oberlin // Urology.
– 2016. – Vol. 92. – P. 75-79.141122.Park, J.Y. Development and External Validation of the Korean ProstateCancer Risk Calculator for High-Grade Prostate Cancer: Comparison with TwoWestern Risk Calculators in an Asian Cohort / J.Y. Park // PloS One.
– 2017. –Vol. 12, № 1. – P. e0168917.123.Peters, J.L. Increased patient satisfaction from transrectal ultrasonographyand biopsy under sedation / J.L. Peters // BJU Int. – 2001. – Vol. 87, № 9. – P.827-830.124.Philip, J. Site of local anaesthesia in transrectal ultrasonography‐guided12‐core prostate biopsy: does it make a difference? / J. Philip // BJU Int. – 2006.– Vol. 97, № 2. – P. 263-265.125.Pinkhasov, G.I.
Complications following prostate needle biopsy requiringhospital admission or emergency department visits–experience from 1000consecutive cases / G.I. Pinkhasov // BJU Int. – 2012. – Vol. 110, № 3. – P. 369374.126.Portmann, J. Physician-patient relationship / J. Portmann // Western J. Med.– 2000. – Vol. 173, № 4. – P. 279.127.Puech, P. Multiparametric MRI-targeted TRUS prostate biopsies usingvisual registration / P. Puech // BioMed Res. Int. – 2014. – 2014.
– P. 1-11.128.Raber, M. Topical prilocaine-lidocaine cream combined with peripheralnerve block improves pain control in prostatic biopsy: results from a prospectiverandomized trial / M. Raber // Eur. Urol. – 2008. – Vol. 53, № 5. – P. 967-975.129.Rabets, J.C. Bupivacaine provides rapid, effective periprostatic anaesthesiafor transrectal prostate biopsy / J.C. Rabets // BJU Int. – 2004. – Vol. 93, № 9.
–P. 1216-1217.130.Radtke, J.P. The current and future role of magnetic resonance imaging inprostate cancer detection and management / J.P. Radtke // Translat. Androl. Urol.– 2015. – Vol. 4, № 3. – P. 326.142131.Richardson, T.D. Half-life determination of serum free prostate-specificantigen following radical retropubic prostatectomy / T.D. Richardson // Urology.– 1996. – Vol.
48, № 6. – P. 40-44.132.Roberts, M.J. Prostate Biopsy Related Infection: a Systematic Review ofRisk Factors, Prevention Strategies and Management Approaches / M.J. Roberts// Urology. – 2017. – Vol. 104, № 6. – P. 11-12.133.Rodrigues, Â.Biopsy sampling and histopathological markers fordiagnosis of prostate cancer / Â. Rodrigues // Exp. Rev. Anticancer Ther. – 2014.– Vol. 14, № 11. – P. 1323-1336.134.Roobol, M.J.Screening for prostate cancer: results of the Rotterdamsection of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer / M.J.Roobol // Eur. Urol.
– 2013. – Vol. 64, № 4. – P. 530-539.135.Rooij, M. Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection:a meta-analysis / M. Rooij // Am. J. Roentgenol. – 2014. – Vol. 202, № 2. – P.343-351.136.Sauvain, J.L.Value of transrectal power Doppler sonography in thedetection of low-risk prostate cancers / J.L.
Sauvain // Diagn. Intervent. Imag. –2013. – Vol. 94, № 1. – P. 60-67.137.Say, R. MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy In Men With PriorNegative Prostate Biopsy For Prostate Cancer / R. Say. - Yale University:EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale, 2016. - 52 p.138.Schimmöller, L. MRI-guided in-bore biopsy: differences between prostatecancer detection and localization in primary and secondary biopsy settings / L.Schimmöller // Am. J. Roentgenol. – 2016.
– Vol. 206, № 1. – P. 92-99.139.Schoots, I.G. Omission of systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsyfrom the MRI targeted approach in men with previous negative prostate biopsymight still be premature / I.G. Schoots // Ann. Translat. Med. – 2016. – Vol. 4, №10. – P. 205.143140.Schouten, M.G. Why and Where do We Miss Significant Prostate Cancerwith Multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging followed by MagneticResonance-guided and Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naïveMen? / M.G. Schouten // Eur.
Urol. – 2017. - Vol. 71, № 6. – P. 896-903.141.Sciarra, A.Value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging anddynamic contrast-enhanced imaging for detecting prostate cancer foci in menwith prior negative biopsy / A. Sciarra // Clin. Cancer Res. – 2010. – Vol. 16, №6. – P. 1875-1883.142.Seçkiner, I.A prospective, randomized controlled study comparinglidocaine and tramadol in periprostatic nerve blockage for transrectal ultrasoundguided prostate biopsy / I. Seçkiner // Urology. – 2011. – Vol.
78, № 2. – P. 257260.143.Shariat, S.F. Comparison of nomograms with other methods for predictingoutcomes in prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature / S.F. Shariat //Clin. Cancer Res. – 2008. – Vol. 14, № 14. – P. 4400-4407.144.Shariat, S.F. Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools / S.F.Shariat // Future Oncol. – 2009. – Vol. 5, № 10. – P.
1555-1584.145.Siddiqui, M.M. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion–guided biopsy withultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer / M.M. Siddiqui //JAMA. – 2015. – Vol. 313, № 4. – P. 390-397.146.Snow, P.B. Artificial neural networks in the diagnosis and prognosis ofprostate cancer: a pilot study / P.B.
Snow, D.S. Smith, W.J. Catalona // Eur. Urol.– 1994. – Vol. 152, № 5. – P. 1923-1926.147.Soloway, M.S. Periprostatic local anesthesia before ultrasound guidedprostate biopsy / M.S. Soloway, C. Öbek // Eur. Urol. – 2000. – Vol. 163, № 1. –P. 172-173.148.Stephan, C. An artificial neural network for five different assay systems ofprostate‐specific antigen in prostate cancer diagnostics / C. Stephan // BJU Int. –2008.
– Vol. 102, № 7. – P. 799-805.144149.Stephan, C. Artificial neural network (ANN) velocity better identifiesbenign prostatic hyperplasia but not prostate cancer compared with PSA velocity/ C. Stephan // BMC Urol. – 2008. – Vol. 8, № 1. – P. 1.150.Stephan, C. New markers and multivariate models for prostate cancerdetection / C. Stephan // Anticancer Res. – 2009. – Vol. 29, № 7. – P. 2589-2600.151.Stirling, B.N.
Comparison of local anesthesia techniques during transrectalultrasound-guided biopsies / B.N. Stirling // Urology. – 2002. – Vol. 60, № 1. –P. 89-92.152.Stoyanova, R. Association of multiparametric MRI quantitative imagingfeatures with prostate cancer gene expression in MRI-targeted prostate biopsies /R. Stoyanova // Oncotarget. – 2016. – Vol. 7, № 33. – P. 53362-53376.153.Taverna, G.Colour Doppler and microbubble contrast agentultrasonography do not improve cancer detection rate in transrectal systematicprostate biopsy sampling / G. Taverna // BJU Int.
– 2011. – Vol. 108, № 11. – P.1723-1727.154.Taylor, A.K. Targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis using rectal swab culturesin men undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy is associatedwith reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications and cost of care/ A.K. Taylor // Eur. Urol.
– 2012. – Vol. 187, № 4. – P. 1275-1279.155.Temiz, M.Z.Local anesthesia type affects cancer detection rate intransrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy / M.Z. Temiz // Int. Braz J Urol. –2015. – Vol. 41, № 5. – P. 859-863.156.Thompson, J.E.Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guideddiagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduceunnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study / J.E.
Thompson //Eur. Urol. – 2014. – Vol. 192, № 1. – P. 67-74.157.Tosoian, J.J.Active surveillance of prostate cancer: use, outcomes,imaging, and diagnostic tools / J.J. Tosoian // American Society of Clinical145Oncology educational book/ASCO. American Society of Clinical Oncology.Meeting. – NIH Public Access, 2016. – Vol. 35. – P. e235.158.Tosoian, J.J. Prognostic value of prostate biopsy grade: forever a product ofsampling / J.J.
Tosoian, J.I. Epstein // BJU Int. – 2017. – Vol. 119, № 1. – P. 5-7.159.Tosoian, J.J. Prostate health index density improves detection of clinically‐significant prostate cancer / J.J. Tosoian // BJU Int. – 2017. - Vol. 120, № 6. – P.793-798.160.Tosoian, J.J. Unscreened older men diagnosed with prostate cancer are atincreased risk of aggressive disease / J.J.
Tosoian // Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis.– 2017. – Vol. 20, № 2. – P. 193-196.161.Turgut, A.T. Complications and limitations related to periprostatic localanesthesia before TRUS‐guided prostate biopsy / A.T. Turgut // J. Clin.Ultrasound. – 2008. – Vol. 36, № 2. – P. 67-71.162.Vaidya, A. Periprostatic Local Anesthesia before Ultrasound–GuidedProstate Biopsy: An Update of the Miami Experience / A.
Vaidya, M.S. Soloway// Eur. Urol. – 2001. – Vol. 40, № 2. – P. 135-138.163.Venegas-Ocampo, P.J. Effectiveness comparison of transperineal pudendalnerve block as anesthesia method in transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy/ P.J. Venegas-Ocampo // Rev. Mex. Urol. – 2010.
– Vol. 70, № 3. – P. 164-170.164.Vickers, A.J. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluatingprediction models / A.J. Vickers, E.B. Elkin // Med. Decis. Making. – 2006. –Vol. 26, № 6. – P. 565-574.165.Villers, A. Role of Imaging as an Adjunct or Replacement for Biopsy:European Experience / A. Villers // Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. – Humana Press,2013. – P. 337-349.166.Von Knobloch, R.Bilateral fine-needle administered local anaestheticnerve block for pain control during TRUS-guided multi-core prostate biopsy: aprospective randomised trial / R.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
