ReviewAsian journal of urology2019
The current role of prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.
Review in Asian journal of urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prostate microcalcification crystallography as a marker of pathology.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Qualitative and Quantitative Assessment of T2-Weighted Imaging Signal Variations in Prostate MRI Following Different Abstinence Periods: A Study in Young Healthy Men.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- A risk model for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer based on bi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging in a Japanese cohort.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Multiparametric MRI in Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer: An Overview and a Practical Approach.Korean journal of radiology · 2021Review
- Health disparities and inequities in the utilization of diagnostic imaging for prostate cancer.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2020Review
- Article
- Locally advanced prostate cancer imaging findings and implications for treatment from the surgical perspective.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2020Review
- [American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2020Article
- Multiparametric prostatic MRI should not be the only method to decide re-biopsy in the patients who had a negative prostatic biopsy.International urology and nephrology · 2019Article
- Prostate cancer: On the road of progress.Asian journal of urology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has shown excellent sensitivity for Gleason ≥7 cancers, especially when their volume is ≥0.5 mL. As a result, performing an mpMRI before prostate biopsy could improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) by adding targeted biopsies to systematic biopsies. Currently, there is a consensus that targeted biopsies improve the detection of csPCa in the repeat biopsy setting and at confirmatory biopsy in patients considering active surveillance. Several prospective multicentric controlled trials recently showed that targeted biopsy also improved csPCa detection in biopsy-naïve patients. The role of mpMRI and targeted biopsy during the follow-up of active surveillance remains unclear. Whether systematic biopsy could be omitted in case of negative mpMRI is also a matter of controversy. mpMRI did show excellent negative predictive values (NPV) in the literature, however, since NPV depends on the prevalence of the disease, negative mpMRI findings should be interpreted in the light of
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.