ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2013
[Imaging of the prostate].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiparametric ultrasound in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2015Pooled it
- Comparison of image-guided targeted biopsies versus systematic randomized biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic literature review of well-designed studies.World journal of urology · 2014Pooled it
- Can transrectal prostate ultrasound compete with multiparametric MRI in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer?Translational andrology and urology · 2020Review
- Innovations in diagnostic imaging of localized prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently several new technologies for prostate imaging have been developed. The aim of these technologies was to improve the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Especially the transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has been refined to the so-called enhanced ultrasound, as regular grey scale TRUS has limited ability to identify cancer lesions in the prostate. In several studies elastography has shown good capability to identify cancer lesions in the prostate as well as to absolutely increase the detection rate of randomized biopsies by up to 10 %.. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound shows varying results in the published literature with increased detection rates on the one hand and unchanged detection rates relative to randomized biopsy on the other hand. The online available ANNA/C-TRUS system shows detection rates with six targeted biopsies that are comparable to the published detection rates of randomized saturation biopsies. Direct systematic comparison to randomized biopsies is missing. The Histoscanning system currently provides the poorest data as no biopsy studies are available. Multicenter trials are mandatory for all new imaging technologies in order to implement them as standard into clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.