Cutting Edge Urology

T his PDF belongs to matthew.hooson@springer.co 30 • CUTTING EDGE - UROLOGY 39. Bittner N, Merrick GS, Butler WM, Bennett A, Galbreath RW (2013) Incidence and pathological features of prostate cancer detected on transperineal template guidedmapping biopsy after negative transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy. J Urol 190:509–514. 40. Taira AV, Merrick GS, Bennett A, Andreini H, Taubenslag W, Galbreath RW, Butler WM, Bittner N, Adamovich E (2013) Transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy as a staging procedure to select patients best suited for active surveillance. Am J Clin Oncol 36:116–120. 41. Pepe P, Patanè D, Panella P, Aragona F (2003) Does the adjunct of ecographic contrast medium Levovist improve the detection rate of prostate cancer? Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 6:159–162. 42. Pepe P, Candiano G, Pennisi M, Aragona F (2010) Can Sonovue targeted biopsy replace extended or saturation biopsy in prostate cancer diagnosis? Our experience at primary and repeat biopsy. Arch Ital Urol Androl 82: 155–159. 43. Taverna G, Morandi G, Seveso M, Giusti G, Benetti A, Colombo P, Minuti F, Grizzi F, Graziotti P (2011) Colour Doppler and microbubble contrast agent ultrasonography do not improve cancer detection rate in transrectal systematic prostate biopsy sampling. BJU Int 108:1723–1727. 44. Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, Caccala AA Jr, Kruecker J, Bejamin CJ (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging/ ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 186:1281–1285. 45. Aboumarzouk OM, Ogston S, Huang Z, Evans A, Melzer A, Stolzenberg JU, Nabi G (2012) Diagnostic accuracy of transrectal elastosonography (TRES) imaging for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int 110: 1414–1423. 46. Hara R, Jo Y, Fujii T, Kondo N, Yokoyoma T, Miyaji Y, Nagai A (2008) Optimal approach for prostate cancer detection as initial biopsy: prospective randomized study comparing transperineal versus transrectal systematic 12-core biopsy. Urology 71:191–195. 47. Kuru TH, Saeb-Parsy K, Cantiani A, Frey J, Lombardo R, Serrao E, Gaziev G, Koo B, Roethke M, Gnanapragasam V, Warren A, Doble A, Hadaschik B, Kastner C (2014) Evolution of repeat prostate biopsy strategies incorporating transperineal and MRI-TRUS fusion techniques. World J Urol 32:945–950. 48. Komai Y, Numao N, Yoshida S, Matsuoka Y, Nakanishi Y, Ishii C, Koga F, Saito K, Masuda H, Fujii Y, Kawakami S, Kihara K (2013) High diagnostic ability of multiparametric mag etic resonance imaging to detect anterior prostate cancer missed by transrectal 12-core biopsy. J Urol 190:867–873. 49. Mozer P, Rouprêt M, Le Cossec C, Granger B, Comperat E, de Gorski A, Cussenot O, Renard-Penna R (2015) First round of targeted biopsies with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion images compared to conventional ultrasound-guided transrectal biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer. BJU Int 115:50–57. 50. Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo G, Candiano G, Pietropaolo F, Pennisi M, Aragona F (2013) Prostate cancer detection at repeat biopsy: can pelvic phased-array multiparametric MRI replace saturation biopsy? Anticancer Res 33:1195–1199. 51. Quentin M, Biondin D, Klasen J, Schek J, Buchbender C, Miese FR, Antoch G, Barski D, Albers P, Arsov C (2012) Evaluation of a structured report of functional prostate magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspicion for prostate cancer or under active surveillance. Urol Int 89:25–29. 52. Hoeks CM, Somford DM, van Oort IM, Vergunst H, Oddens JR, Smits GA, Roobol MJ, Bul M, Hambrock T, Witjes JA, Fütterer JJ, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Barentsz JO (2014) Value of 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonanceguided biopsy for early risk restratification in active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study. Invest Radiol 49:165–172. 53. Scott S, Samaratunga H, Chabert C, Breckenridge M, Gianduzzo T (2015) Is transperineal prostate biopsy more accurate than transrectal biopsy in determining final Gleason score and clinical risk category? A comparative analysis. BJU Int 116(Suppl 3):26–3 0. doi:10.1111/bju.13165. 54. Bul M, Zhu X, Valdagni R, Pickle s T, Kakehi Y, Rannikko A, Bjartell A, van der Schoot DK, Cornel EB, Conti GN, Boevé ER, Staerman F, Vis-Maters J J, Vergunst H, Jaspars JJ, Strölin P, van Muilekom E, Schröder FH, Bangma CH, Roobol MJ (2013) Active s urveilla nce for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study. Eur Urol 63:597–603. 55. Chung PH, Darwish OM, Roehrborn CG, Kapur P, Lotan Y (2015) Histologic upgrading in patients eligible for active surveillance on saturation biopsy. Can J Urol 22:7656–7660. 56. Thompson JE, Hayen A, Landau A, Haynes AM, Kalapara A, Ischia J, Matthews J, Frydenberg M, Stricker PD (2015) Medium-term oncological outcomes for extended vs. saturation biopsy and transrectal vs. transperineal biopsy in active surveillance for prostate cancer. BJU Int 115:884–891. 57. Phan KN, Porter CR, Odem-Davis K, Wolff EM, Jeldres C, Wei JT, Morgan TM (2015) Transperineal template guided prostate biopsy selects candidates for active surveillance: how many cores are enough? J Urol 194:674–679. Cutting EDGE_Urology(SUN)_final.indd 30 27-Mar-18 10:00:30 AM