Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2006
DOI: 10.1159/000096332
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pitfalls with MRI Evaluation of Prostate Cancer Detection

Abstract: Introduction: To assess differences between MRI findings and histopathologically defined prostate cancer localization, we compared clinical results with mapping of radical prostatectomy specimens, and conducted a retrospective MRI cancer localization re-assessment by a urologist-technician after surgery. Methods: We performed MRI for a total of 37 suspected prostate cancer patients. Subsequently, all underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy after prostate biopsy for confirmation of the diagnosis. All the spe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 38 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The clinical significance of the contralateral local failures after US-IMRT in patients with low-risk and low-volume disease is debatable, given that such patients typically have excellent clinical outcomes, even without radical therapy, under current active surveillance protocols [19]. Nevertheless, the contralateral failures in our study, despite MRI screening and enrollment of only low risk patients, underscore the multifocal nature of prostate cancer and highlight the limitations of MRI to reliably identify patients with unifocal disease who may be appropriate candidates for focal prostate cancer therapies, a topic of ongoing debate in the prostate cancer community [20-22]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The clinical significance of the contralateral local failures after US-IMRT in patients with low-risk and low-volume disease is debatable, given that such patients typically have excellent clinical outcomes, even without radical therapy, under current active surveillance protocols [19]. Nevertheless, the contralateral failures in our study, despite MRI screening and enrollment of only low risk patients, underscore the multifocal nature of prostate cancer and highlight the limitations of MRI to reliably identify patients with unifocal disease who may be appropriate candidates for focal prostate cancer therapies, a topic of ongoing debate in the prostate cancer community [20-22]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%