FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1544105992> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1544105992 endingPage "820" @default.
• W1544105992 startingPage "812" @default.
• W1544105992 abstract "Study Type – Diagnostic (validating cohort) Level of Evidence 1b What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)‐guided biopsies can miss prostate cancer and misclassify risk in a diagnostic setting; the exact extent to which it does so in a repeat biopsy strategy in men with low–intermediate risk prostate cancer is unknown. A simulation study of different biopsy strategies showed that repeat 12‐core TRUS biopsy performs poorly. Adding anterior sampling improves on this but the highest accuracy is achieved using transperineal template prostate mapping using a 5 mm sampling frame. OBJECTIVE To determine the effectiveness of two sampling strategies; repeat transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)‐biopsy and transperineal template prostate mapping (TPM) to detect and exclude lesions of ≥0.2 mL or ≥0.5 mL using computer simulation on reconstructed three‐dimensional (3‐D) computer models of radical whole‐mount specimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS Computer simulation on reconstructed 3‐D computer models of radical whole‐mount specimens was used to evaluate the performance characteristics of repeat TRUS‐biopsy and TPM to detect and exclude lesions of ≥0.2 mL or ≥0.5 mL. In all, 107 consecutive cases were analysed (1999–2001) with simulations repeated 500 times for each biopsy strategy. TPM and five different TRUS‐biopsy strategies were simulated; the latter involved a standard 12‐core sampling and incorporated variable amounts of error, as well as the addition of anterior cores. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values for detection of lesions with a volume of ≥0.2 mL or ≥0.5 mL were calculated. RESULTS The mean ( sd ) age and PSA concentration were 61 (6.4) years and 8.5 (5.9) ng/mL, respectively.In all, 53% (57/107) had low–intermediate risk disease. In all, 665 foci were reconstructed; there were 149 foci ≥0.2 mL and 97 ≥ 0.5 mL in the full cohort and 68 ≥ 0.2 mL and 43 ≥ 0.5 mL in the low–intermediate risk group. Overall, TPM accuracy (area under the receiver operating curve, AUC) was ≈0.90 compared with AUC 0.70–0.80 for TRUS‐biopsy. In addition, at best, TRUS‐biopsy missed 30–40% of lesions of ≥0.2 mL and ≥0.5 mL whilst TPM missed 5% of such lesions. CONCLUSION TPM under simulation conditions appears the most effective re‐classification strategy, although augmented TRUS‐biopsy techniques are better than standard TRUS‐biopsy." @default.
• W1544105992 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5008243215 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5028011301 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5032309114 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5038650272 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5041766082 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5046733766 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5049580074 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5049845313 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5055015769 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5055250721 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5066703217 @default.
• W1544105992 creator A5083172675 @default.
• W1544105992 date "2012-03-06" @default.
• W1544105992 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W1544105992 title "A biopsy simulation study to assess the accuracy of several transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-biopsy strategies compared with template prostate mapping biopsies in patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy" @default.
• W1544105992 cites W1965849715 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W1973034389 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W1976862087 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W1979570678 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W1979940301 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W1983145936 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W1995723227 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2003065518 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2010438775 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2010442756 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2018061890 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2033882691 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2045862330 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2051072100 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2055703903 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2065372428 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2076956112 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2102976033 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2115895082 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2126652349 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2130538955 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2131241259 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2135528735 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2145071848 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2146699704 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2166438301 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2167293541 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2172183230 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W2963921344 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W4255375128 @default.
• W1544105992 cites W49263098 @default.
• W1544105992 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2012.10933.x" @default.
• W1544105992 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22394583" @default.
• W1544105992 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W1544105992 type Work @default.
• W1544105992 sameAs 1544105992 @default.
• W1544105992 citedByCount "81" @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922012 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922013 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922014 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922015 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922016 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922017 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922018 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922019 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922020 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922021 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922022 @default.
• W1544105992 countsByYear W15441059922023 @default.
• W1544105992 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5008243215 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5028011301 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5032309114 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5038650272 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5041766082 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5046733766 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5049580074 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5049845313 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5055015769 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5055250721 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5066703217 @default.
• W1544105992 hasAuthorship W1544105992A5083172675 @default.
• W1544105992 hasBestOaLocation W15441059921 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C106131492 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C140779682 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C2775934546 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C2776235491 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C2779466945 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C2780002838 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C2780192828 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C2781217009 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C2781406297 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C31972630 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConceptScore W1544105992C106131492 @default.
• W1544105992 hasConceptScore W1544105992C121608353 @default.

• next