ČESKÁ UROLOGIE / CZECH UROLOGY – 1 / 2019

50 ORIGINÁLNÍ PRÁCE Ces Urol 2019; 23(1): 43–50 4. Stejskal J, Jašková V, Pavličko A, et al. Diagnostika karcinomu prostaty pomocí fúzní biopsie. Ces Urol 2018; 22(2): 87–98. 5. Kudláčková Š, Záťura F, Tüdös Z. Cílená biopsie prostaty pomocí magnetické rezonance – 1. část. Urol. praxi 2017; 18(2): 69–72. 6. Ahmed HU, El‑Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, 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. 7. BensonMC, Whang IS, Pantuck A, et al. Prostate specific antigen density: ameans of distinguishing benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer. J Urol. 1992; 147(3 Pt 2): 815–816. 8. Padhani AR, Weinreb J, Rosenkrantz AB, et al. Prostate Imaging‑Reporting and Data System Steering Committee: PI‑RADS v2 Status Update and Future Directions. Eur Urol. 2019 ; 75(3): 385–396. 9. Venderink W, van Luijtelaar A, Bomers JG, et al. Results of Targeted Biopsy in Men with Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesions Classified Equivocal, Likely or Highly Likely to Be Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2018 ; 73(3): 353–360. 10. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22(4): 746–757. 11. Jelidi A, Ohana M, Labani A, et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis: Efficacy of a simple electromagnetic MRI‑TRUS fusion method to target biopsies. Eur J Radiol. 2017; 86: 127–134. 12. Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994; 271(5): 368–374. 13. Simmons LAM, Kanthabalan A, AryaM, et al. The PICTURE study: diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men requiring a repeat prostate biopsy. Br J Cancer 2017; 116(9): 1159–1165. 14. Kotb AF, Spaner S, Crump T, Hyndman ME. The role of mpMRI and PSA density in patients with an initial negative prostatic biopsy. World J Urol. 2018 ; 36(12): 2021–2025. 15. Schoots IG. MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI‑RADS 3 lesions? Transl Androl Urol. 2018; 7(1): 70–82. 16. Distler FA, Radtke JP, Bonekamp D, et al. The Value of PSA Density in Combination with PI‑RADS for the Accuracy of Prostate Cancer Prediction. J Urol. 2017; 198(3): 575–582. 17. Washino S, Okochi T, Saito K, et al. Combination of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI‑RADS) score and prostate‑specific antigen (PSA) density predicts biopsy outcome in prostate biopsy naive patients. BJU Int. 2017; 119(2): 225–233. 18. Hansen NL, Barrett T, Koo B, et al. The influence of prostate‑specific antigen density on positive and negative predictive values of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to detect Gleason score 7-10 prostate cancer in a repeat biopsy setting. BJU Int. 2017; 119(5): 724–730. 19. Brizmohun Appayya M, Adshead J, Ahmed HU, et al. National implementation of multi‑parametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection – recommendations from a UK consensus meeting. BJU Int. 2018; 122(1): 13–25. 20. Alberts AR, Roobol MJ, Drost FH, et al. Risk‑stratification based on magnetic resonance imaging and prostate‑specific antigen density may reduce unnecessary follow‑up biopsy procedures in men on active surveillance for low‑risk prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2017 ; 120(4): 511–519. 21. Esses SJ, Taneja SS, Rosenkrantz AB. Imaging Facilities‘ Adherence to PI‑RADS v2 Minimum Technical Standards for the Performance of Prostate MRI. Acad Radiol. 2018; 25(2): 188–195. 22. Sonn GA, Fan RE, Ghanouni P, et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging Interpretation Varies Substantially Across Radiologists. Eur Urol Focus. 2017 ; S2405–4569(17): 30266–30273.