Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26704284›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2015

[Prostate biopsy: Procedure in the clinical routine].

T Enzmann, T Tokas, K Korte, M Ritter, P Hammerer, L Franzaring, H Heynemann, H-W Gottfried, H Bertermann, M Meyer-Schwickerath and 3 more

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

T EnzmannKlinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Klinikum Brandenburg, Hochschulklinikum der Medizinischen Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane, Brandenburg an der Havel, Deutschland.
T TokasUrologische Klinik des Ev. Luth. Diakonissenkrankenhauses, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Knuthstr. 1, 24939, Flensburg, Deutschland.
K KorteUrologische Klinik des Ev. Luth. Diakonissenkrankenhauses, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Knuthstr. 1, 24939, Flensburg, Deutschland.
M RitterKlinik für Urologie, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Mannheim, Deutschland.
P HammererKlinik für Urologie und Uroonkologie, Städtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH, Braunschweig, Deutschland.
L FranzaringKemperhof, Urologie und Kinderurologie, Gemeinschaftsklinikum Mittelrhein, Koblenz, Deutschland.
H HeynemannUniversitätsklinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Deutschland.
H-W GottfriedUrologie und Kinderurologie, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Göttingen-Weende, Göttingen, Deutschland.
H BertermannUrologische Gemeinschaftspraxis Prüner Gang, Kiel, Deutschland.
M Meyer-SchwickerathUologische Praxisklinik Essen, Essen, Deutschland.
B WirthUrologie, Hospital zum Heiligen Geist, Kempen, Deutschland.
A PelzerUrologische Klinik, Klinikum Ingolstadt, Ingolstadt, Deutschland.
T LochUrologische Klinik des Ev. Luth. Diakonissenkrankenhauses, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Knuthstr. 1, 24939, Flensburg, Deutschland. lochti@diako.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last decade there has been a 25% decrease in the mortality rates for prostate cancer. The reasons for this significant decrease are most likely associated with the application of urological screening tests. The main tools for early detection are currently increased public awareness of the disease, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided topographically assignable biopsy sampling. Together with the histopathological results these features provide essential information for risk stratification, diagnostics and therapy decisions. The evolution of prostate biopsy techniques as well as the use of PSA testing has led to an increased identification of asymptomatic men, where further clarification is necessary. Significant efforts and increased clinical research focus on determining the appropriate indications for a prostate biopsy and the optimal technique to achieve better detection rates. The most widely used imaging modality for the prostate is TRUS; however, there are no clearly defined standards for the clinical approach for each individual biopsy procedure, dealing with continuous technical optimization and in particular the developments in imaging. In this review the current principles, techniques, new approaches and instrumentation of prostate biopsy imaging control are presented within the framework of the structured educational approach.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEarly Detection of CancerEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationGermanyHumansImage EnhancementMalePatient PositioningProstatic NeoplasmsUrologyBiopsyDiagnostic imagingFusionProstate cancerTransrectal ultrasound

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.