FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2892894820> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2892894820 endingPage "502" @default.
• W2892894820 startingPage "496" @default.
• W2892894820 abstract "No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Mar 2019Three Tesla Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Comparison of Performance with and without Endorectal Coil for Prostate Cancer Detection, PI-RADS™ version 2 Category and Staging with Whole Mount Histopathology Correlation Sohrab Afshari Mirak, Sepideh Shakeri, Amirhossein Mohammadian Bajgiran, Ely R. Felker, Kyung Hyun Sung, Nazanin Hajarol Asvadi, Pooria Khoshnoodi, Daniela Markovic, Danielle Ponzini, Preeti Ahuja, Anthony Sisk, Robert E. Reiter, David Lu, and Steven S. Raman Sohrab Afshari MirakSohrab Afshari Mirak *Correspondence: 757 Westwood Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90095 (telephone: 310-206-5687; FAX: 310-825-6201; e-mail: E-mail Address: [email protected]). Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Sepideh ShakeriSepideh Shakeri Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Amirhossein Mohammadian BajgiranAmirhossein Mohammadian Bajgiran Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Ely R. FelkerEly R. Felker Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Kyung Hyun SungKyung Hyun Sung Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Nazanin Hajarol AsvadiNazanin Hajarol Asvadi Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Pooria KhoshnoodiPooria Khoshnoodi Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Daniela MarkovicDaniela Markovic Department of Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Danielle PonziniDanielle Ponzini Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Preeti AhujaPreeti Ahuja Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Anthony SiskAnthony Sisk Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , Robert E. ReiterRobert E. Reiter Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , David LuDavid Lu Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author , and Steven S. RamanSteven S. Raman Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.09.054AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: We investigated the performance of 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with and without an endorectal coil to detect prostate cancer with a whole mount histopathology reference. Materials and Methods: This retrospective HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) compliant, institutional review board approved, case-control study included patients who underwent 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with and without an endorectal coil from July 2009 to December 2016 prior to prostatectomy. The tumor detection rate was calculated for total and index lesions. Lesion magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology features were compared between the 2 groups. Using SPSS®, version 24 p <0.05 was considered significant. Results: A total of 871 whole mount histopathology lesions in 429 patients with a mean ± SD age of 61.8 ± 7 years were included in analysis. The subcohorts with and without an endorectal coil comprised 260 and 169 patients with a total of 529 and 342 lesions, respectively. The overall tumor detection rates in all patients, and in the endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil subcohorts were 49.6% (432 of 871 patients), 50.5% (267 of 529) and 48.2% (165 of 342), respectively. The index tumor detection rates overall, and in the endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil subcohorts were 77.6% (333 of 429 patients), 78.5% (204 of 260) and 76.3% (129 of 169), respectively. In the endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil subcohorts we detected 35.9% (66 of 184) and 48.4% (76 of 157) of anterior lesions (p = 0.019), 58% (200 of 345) and 48.1% (89 of 185) of posterior lesions (p = 0.025), 37.3% (41 of 110) and 54.4% (62 of 114) of transition zone lesions (p = 0.010), and 53.7% (225 of 419) and 45.2% (103 of 228) of peripheral lesions (p = 0.033), respectively. After adjusting for clinical and pathological factors the endorectal coil group only showed higher detection of peripheral and posterior prostate cancer. Conclusions: We found that 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with and without an endorectal coil had similar detection of overall and index prostate cancer. However, the endorectal coil subcohort had significantly higher detection of posterior and peripheral prostate cancer, and lower detection of anterior and transition zone prostate cancer. References 1. : “In-bore” MRI-guided prostate biopsy using an endorectal nonmagnetic device: a prospective study of 70 consecutive patients. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2017; 15: 417. Google Scholar 2. : Prostate cancer: 1.5 T endo-coil dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and MR spectroscopy—correlation with prostate biopsy and prostatectomy histopathological data. Eur J Radiol 2011; 80: 292. Google Scholar 3. , Aliyari Ghasabeh M: MRI in prostate cancer. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2013 15: e16620. Google Scholar 4. : Characteristics of detected and missed prostate cancer foci on 3-T multiparametric MRI using an endorectal coil correlated with whole-mount thin-section histopathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205: W87. Google Scholar 5. : Comparison of real-time elastography and multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a whole-mount step-section analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202: W263. Google Scholar 6. : Impact of the use of an endorectal coil for 3 T prostate MRI on image quality and cancer detection rate. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 40640. Google Scholar 7. : Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology 2011; 261: 46. Google Scholar 8. : Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: present and future. Curr Opin Urol 2008; 18: 71. Google Scholar 9. : Comparison of pelvic phased-array versus endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla for local staging of prostate cancer. Yonsei Med J 2012; 53: 550. Google Scholar 10. : Prostate magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging at 1.5 Tesla with endorectal coil versus 3.0 Tesla without endorectal coil: comparison of spectral quality. Clin Imaging 2015; 39: 636. Google Scholar 11. : MR spectroscopic imaging of peripheral zone in prostate cancer using a 3T MRI scanner: endorectal versus external phased array coils. Magn Reson Insights 2013; 6: 51. Google Scholar 12. : Diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate at 3.0 T: comparison of endorectal coil (ERC) MRI and phased-array coil (PAC) MRI—the impact of SNR on ADC measurement. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82: e515. Google Scholar 13. : Initial results of 3-dimensional 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in the localization of prostate cancer at 3 Tesla: should we use an endorectal coil?Invest Radiol 2011; 46: 301. Google Scholar 14. : Is endorectal coil necessary for the staging of clinically localized prostate cancer? Comparison of non-endorectal versus endorectal MR imaging. World J Urol 2010; 28: 667. Google Scholar 15. : Performance comparison of 1.5-T endorectal coil MRI with 3.0-T nonendorectal coil MRI in patients with prostate cancer. Acad Radiol 2015; 22: 467. Google Scholar 16. : Clinical application of a 3D ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy system. Urol Oncol 2011; 29: 334. Google Scholar 17. American College of Radiology: PI-RADS™ Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System 2015, version 2. Reston: American College of Radiology 2015. Google Scholar 18. : Local staging of prostatic carcinoma: comparison of transrectal sonography and endorectal MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166: 103. Google Scholar 19. : Preoperative T-staging of prostatic carcinoma: endorectal magnetic resonance tomography compared with other imaging and clinical methods. Rofo 1996; 165: 152. Google Scholar 20. : Comparison of prostate cancer detection at 3-T MRI with and without an endorectal coil: a prospective, paired-patient study. Urol Oncol 2016; 34: 255.e7. Google Scholar 21. : MR imaging of the prostate at 3 Tesla: comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 Tesla. Acad Radiol 2004; 11: 857. Google Scholar 22. : Comparison of phased-array 3.0-T and endorectal 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007; 31: 534. Google Scholar 23. : Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T—comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance. Radiology 2007; 244: 184. Google Scholar 24. : Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil T2W and diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 Tesla for localizing prostate cancer: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014; 39: 1443. Google Scholar 25. : Accuracy and agreement of PIRADSv2 for prostate cancer mpMRI: a multireader study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 45: 579. Google Scholar 26. : Impact of clinical parameters on the diagnostic accuracy of endorectal coil MRI for the detection of prostate cancer. Urol Int 2011; 86: 393. Google Scholar 27. : Endorectal MRI for prediction of tumor site, tumor size, and local extension of prostate cancer. Urology 2004; 64: 101. Google Scholar 28. : Prostate cancer: interobserver agreement and accuracy with the revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at multiparametric MR imaging. Radiology 2015; 277: 741. Google Scholar 29. : Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection. Urol Int 2010; 84: 388. Google Scholar 30. : The role of preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the decision regarding whether to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 2004; 100: 2655. Google Scholar The corresponding author certifies that, when applicable, a statement(s) has been included in the manuscript documenting institutional review board, ethics committee or ethical review board study approval; principles of Helsinki Declaration were followed in lieu of formal ethics committee approval; institutional animal care and use committee approval; all human subjects provided written informed consent with guarantees of confidentiality; IRB approved protocol number; animal approved project number. No direct or indirect commercial, personal, academic, political, religious or ethical incentive is associated with publishing this article. © 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited bySmith J (2019) This Month in Adult UrologyJournal of Urology, VOL. 201, NO. 3, (411-413), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2019. Volume 201Issue 3March 2019Page: 496-502Supplementary Materials Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2019 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordsanal canalneoplasm gradingprostatic neoplasmsmagnetic resonance imagingdiagnostic imagingMetricsAuthor Information Sohrab Afshari Mirak Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California *Correspondence: 757 Westwood Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90095 (telephone: 310-206-5687; FAX: 310-825-6201; e-mail: E-mail Address: [email protected]). More articles by this author Sepideh Shakeri Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Amirhossein Mohammadian Bajgiran Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Ely R. Felker Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Kyung Hyun Sung Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Nazanin Hajarol Asvadi Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Pooria Khoshnoodi Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Daniela Markovic Department of Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Danielle Ponzini Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Preeti Ahuja Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Anthony Sisk Pathology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Robert E. Reiter Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author David Lu Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Steven S. Raman Departments of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Expand All The corresponding author certifies that, when applicable, a statement(s) has been included in the manuscript documenting institutional review board, ethics committee or ethical review board study approval; principles of Helsinki Declaration were followed in lieu of formal ethics committee approval; institutional animal care and use committee approval; all human subjects provided written informed consent with guarantees of confidentiality; IRB approved protocol number; animal approved project number. No direct or indirect commercial, personal, academic, political, religious or ethical incentive is associated with publishing this article. Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ..." @default.
• W2892894820 created "2018-10-05" @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5008168172 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5013166503 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5014982708 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5025499100 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5028893537 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5051647634 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5058140837 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5058617146 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5059053660 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5064290590 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5065977742 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5084368894 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5087591232 @default.
• W2892894820 creator A5088051120 @default.
• W2892894820 date "2019-03-01" @default.
• W2892894820 modified "2023-10-11" @default.
• W2892894820 title "Three Tesla Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Comparison of Performance with and without Endorectal Coil for Prostate Cancer Detection, PI-RADS™ version 2 Category and Staging with Whole Mount Histopathology Correlation" @default.
• W2892894820 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.09.054" @default.
• W2892894820 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30273608" @default.
• W2892894820 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2892894820 type Work @default.
• W2892894820 sameAs 2892894820 @default.
• W2892894820 citedByCount "21" @default.
• W2892894820 countsByYear W28928948202019 @default.
• W2892894820 countsByYear W28928948202020 @default.
• W2892894820 countsByYear W28928948202021 @default.
• W2892894820 countsByYear W28928948202022 @default.
• W2892894820 countsByYear W28928948202023 @default.
• W2892894820 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5008168172 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5013166503 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5014982708 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5025499100 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5028893537 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5051647634 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5058140837 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5058617146 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5059053660 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5064290590 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5065977742 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5084368894 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5087591232 @default.
• W2892894820 hasAuthorship W2892894820A5088051120 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C119599485 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C143409427 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C2776235491 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C2780192828 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C2910607126 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C2985322473 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C30403606 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C544855455 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C119599485 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C121608353 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C126322002 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C126838900 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C127413603 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C142724271 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C143409427 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C2776235491 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C2780192828 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C2910607126 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C2985322473 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C2989005 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C30403606 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C544855455 @default.
• W2892894820 hasConceptScore W2892894820C71924100 @default.
• W2892894820 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2892894820 hasLocation W28928948201 @default.
• W2892894820 hasLocation W28928948202 @default.
• W2892894820 hasOpenAccess W2892894820 @default.
• W2892894820 hasPrimaryLocation W28928948201 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W1980245127 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W2064643060 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W2073019566 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W2273540743 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W2323327442 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W2410191098 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W2599589207 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W3021363125 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W3166118201 @default.
• W2892894820 hasRelatedWork W3167295711 @default.
• W2892894820 hasVolume "201" @default.
• W2892894820 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2892894820 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2892894820 magId "2892894820" @default.
• W2892894820 workType "article" @default.