ČESKÁ UROLOGIE / CZECH UROLOGY – 2 / 2018

96 Ces Urol 2018; 22(2): 87–98 PŘEHLEDOVÝ ČLÁNEK Seminars and Original Investigations (Internet) 2017;Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com/login. aspx?authtype=shib & custid=s1240919 & profile=eds 8. Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2013; 64(6): 876–892. 9. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER‑Medicare. J Urol 2011; 186(5): 1830–1834. 10. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM. Is repeat prostate biopsy associated with a gre‑ ater risk of hospitalization? Data from SEER‑Medicare. J Urol 2013; 189(3): 867–870. 11. Zisman A, Leibovici D, Kleinmann J, Siegel YI, Lindner A. The impact of prostate biopsy on patient well‑being: a prospective study of pain, anxiety and erectile dysfunction. J Urol 2001; 165(2): 445–454. 12. Wade J, Rosario DJ, Macefield RC, et al. Psychological impact of prostate biopsy: physical symptoms, anxiety, and depression. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31(33): 4235–4241. 13. Bárta J, Rýznarová Z, Klézl P, et al. Postavení magnetické rezonance a magnetické rezonanční spekt‑ roskopie při detekci karcinomu prostaty. Ces Uro 2010; 14(3): 186–196. 14. Yoo S, Kim JK, Jeong IG. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: a review and update for urologists. Korean J Urol 2015; 56(7): 487–497. 15. Bomers JGR, Barentsz JO. Standardization of multiparametric prostate MR imaging using PI‑RADS. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014: 431680. 16. Shah ZK, Elias SN, Abaza R, et al. Performance comparison of 1.5-T endorectal coil MRI with 3.0-T nonendorectal coil MRI in patients with prostate cancer. Acad Radiol 2015; 22(4): 467–474. 17. Park BK, Kim B, Kim CK, Lee HM, Kwon GY. Comparison of phased‑array 3.0-T and endorectal 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007; 31(4): 534–538. 18. Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. PI‑RADS Prostate Imaging – Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 2016; 69(1): 16–40. 19. Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Gallardo EC, et al. Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil T2W and diffusion‑weighted MRI at 3 Tesla for localizing prostate cancer: correlation with whole‑mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014; 39(6): 1443–1448. 20. Thompson JE, van Leeuwen PJ, Moses D, et al. The diagnostic performance of multiparametric mag‑ netic resonance imaging to detect significant prostate cancer. J Urol 2016; 195(5): 1428–1435. 21. Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2015; 68(6): 1045–1053. 22. Simmons LAM, Kanthabalan A, Arya M, et al. The PICTURE study: diagnostic accuracy of multipara‑ metric MRI in men requiring a repeat prostate biopsy. Br J Cancer 2017; 116(9): 1159–1165. 23. Ahmed HU, El‑Shater Bosaily A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi‑parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 2017; 389(10071): 815–822. 24. Turkbey B, Pinto PA, Mani H, et al. Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection--histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2010; 255(1): 89–99. 25. Feng TS, Sharif‑Afshar AR, Smith SC, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging localizes established extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2015; 33(3): 109.e15–22. 26. Turkbey B, Choyke PL. PIRADS 2.0: what is new? Diagn Interv Radiol 2015; 21(5): 382–384. 27. Quentin M, Blondin D, Arsov C, et al. Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging guided in‑bore prostate biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in biopsy naïve men with elevated prostate specific antigen. J Urol 2014; 192(5): 1374–1379.