ライフサイエンスコーパス: radical prostatectomy

1 monitoring, 545 to radiotherapy, and 553 to radical prostatectomy).

2 -standard pathologic specimens obtained from radical prostatectomy.

3 multaneous (18)F-fluciclovine PET/MRI before radical prostatectomy.

4 ts underwent 3.0-T MR imaging shortly before radical prostatectomy.

5 ogy in men with localized disease undergoing radical prostatectomy.

6 CT at a median of 4 d (range, 0-47 d) before radical prostatectomy.

7 ion therapy for prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy.

8 y one quarter of patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy.

9 his cohort demonstrated adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy.

10 r active surveillance, radiation therapy, or radical prostatectomy.

11 ne salvage radiation treatment after primary radical prostatectomy.

12 cal) and long-term (oncological) outcomes of radical prostatectomy.

13 n patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

14 iochemical recurrence in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy.

15 lity for patients who are not candidates for radical prostatectomy.

16 r 563 prostate cancer patients who underwent radical prostatectomy.

17 recurring after image-guided radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy.

18 metastases, and/or PCa-specific death after radical prostatectomy.

19 atio, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7; P = .02) vs open radical prostatectomy.

20 PCa) patients with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy.

21 n the incidence of groin hernia repair after radical prostatectomy.

22 was shown to predict poor survival following radical prostatectomy.

23 59.2 years) who underwent MR imaging before radical prostatectomy.

24 ntrast material-enhanced MR imaging prior to radical prostatectomy.

25 t multiparametric MR imaging at 3.0 T before radical prostatectomy.

26 d at baseline, mid-point, and at the time of radical prostatectomy.

27 antigen level #15 mug/L) immediately before radical prostatectomy.

28 ovel techniques in nerve preservation during radical prostatectomy.

29 throughs in improving potency outcomes after radical prostatectomy.

30 of surgical margins intraoperatively during radical prostatectomy.

31 ted and DW MR imaging of the prostate before radical prostatectomy.

32 ression should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy.

33 s to anastomotic stricture and RUF following radical prostatectomy.

34 igh risk of prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

35 er screening, came a renewed interest in the radical prostatectomy.

36 retropubic prostatectomy to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

37 of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

38 ative radiotherapy to the prostate bed after radical prostatectomy.

39 order to improve potency outcomes following radical prostatectomy.

40 dministration of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy.

41 (combined biopsy), and 404 (19.2%) underwent radical prostatectomy.

42 tional imaging guidance during nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy.

43 17 followed by robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

44 on factor, is linked to recurrence following radical prostatectomy.

45 ow concentrations have to be monitored after radical prostatectomy.

46 e, and 36% (62/172) for PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

47 nd grade reclassification between biopsy and radical prostatectomy.

48 nce and from 11 primary lymphadenectomies at radical prostatectomy.

49 553 (22%) participants had pathologic EPE at radical prostatectomy.

50 sment of biochemical cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

51 nical utility of these measures in men after radical prostatectomy.

52 ntinence 3 months following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

53 ic bed in men with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy.

54 -1007 for biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy.

55 survivorship goals for sexual recovery after radical prostatectomy.

56 ogression to metastasis in patients choosing radical prostatectomy.

57 o had undergone MP MR imaging and subsequent radical prostatectomy.

58 tal Association annual surveys and performed radical prostatectomies.

59 ssociated with a 30% increase in the rate of radical prostatectomies.

60 , hysterectomy (1.8% vs 3.9%; P < .001), and radical prostatectomy (1.0% vs 2.4%; P < .001).

61 erapy (10.57 QALYs), IMRT (10.51 QALYs), and radical prostatectomy (10.23 QALYs).

62 operations were performed for 20 500 (67.6%) radical prostatectomies, 1405 (6.8%) total nephrectomies

63 y (57.9% [95% CI, 57.4%-58.4%]), followed by radical prostatectomy (19.1% [95% CI, 18.7%-19.5%]) and

64 cohort included 30345 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy; 20802, total nephrectomy; 8060, p

65 Among men assigned to radical prostatectomy, 21 (5.8%) died from prostate canc

66 ned urinary incontinence was associated with radical prostatectomy (33.6 [95% CI, 27.8-39.2]); acute

67 rsened by 3 months for patients who received radical prostatectomy (36.2 [95% CI, 30.4-42.0]), extern

68 tor curve [AUC] 0.70 [95% CI 0.65-0.76]) and radical prostatectomy (4.0 [1.6-9.7]; p=0.0024; AUC 0.57

69 fic antigen reached a threshold (1 ng/mL for radical prostatectomy; 4 ng/mL for radiation or primary

70 314 pursued active surveillance (27.5%), 469 radical prostatectomy (41.1%), 249 external beam radioth

71 isk disease), of whom 1523 (59.7%) underwent radical prostatectomy, 598 (23.5%) EBRT, and 429 (16.8%)

72 tive surveillance exceeded that from upfront radical prostatectomy after 3-5 years of follow-up and m

73 opic radical prostatectomy is eclipsing open radical prostatectomy among men with clinically localize

74 s occurred in 23 (33.8%) of 68 patients with radical prostatectomy and 16 (50%) of 32 patients previo

75 Of these, 34 (89%) had undergone radical prostatectomy and 4 (11%) had undergone radiatio

76 tients with pN1 prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy and anatomically extended pelvic l

77 ipants had hospital and physician claims for radical prostatectomy and diagnostic codes for prostate

78 emical recurrence (BCR) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and ePLND in prostate cancer patie

79 2016, 920 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and ePLND with or without SNB (184

80 or (18)F-DCFPyL) followed by robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic LN dissection

81 ith intermediate- and high-grade PCa, before radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node (LN

82 All patients underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dis

83 ve and intraoperative decision-making during radical prostatectomy and focal therapy treatments.

84 early prostate cancer to watchful waiting or radical prostatectomy and followed them through the end

85 is often necessary in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy and have evidence of prostate-canc

86 thermore, some patients who have undergone a radical prostatectomy and have no evidence of disease fo

87 SMA) PET/CT scans were performed followed by radical prostatectomy and intraoperative CLI of the exci

88 tate cancer and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and low PSA concentrations (<=2.0

89 nd, compare (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT findings with radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection (

90 ent, patients are more likely to recur after radical prostatectomy and progression to metastatic dise

91 prostate cancer biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy and PSA levels ranging from 0.2 to

92 Men treated with radical prostatectomy and radiation therapy had a signif

93 To review the ways in which the quality of radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostat

94 hip between adverse pathology at the time of radical prostatectomy and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-

95 in patients with suspected recurrence after radical prostatectomy and to identify an optimal imaging

96 ears), all of whom were scheduled to undergo radical prostatectomy and underwent preoperative 3-T mul

97 y-proven localized prostate cancer preceding radical prostatectomy, and cohort B patients had metasta

98 We compared active monitoring, radical prostatectomy, and external-beam radiotherapy fo

99 radiation therapy, in 1-6% of patients after radical prostatectomy, and in 5-9% following brachythera

100 t of patients from the USA who had undergone radical prostatectomy, and in a cohort of randomly selec

101 vestigated the effects of active monitoring, radical prostatectomy, and radical radiotherapy with hor

102 Patients then underwent radical prostatectomy, and the resected gland was sliced

103 ecurrence for the cohort of patients who had radical prostatectomy, and time to death from prostate c

104 subset of anastomotic contractures following radical prostatectomy are recurrent and refractory to st

105 ancer (PCa) salvage radiotherapy (SRT) after radical prostatectomy are usually drawn in the absence o

106 (PCa) cohorts identified NRP1 expression at radical prostatectomy as an independent prognostic bioma

107 Radical prostatectomy, as a primary monotherapy, offers

108 and Dec 31, 2014, 19 256 patients underwent radical prostatectomy at an NHS provider in England.

109 2 patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy at one of four US academic centers

110 We analyzed 471 men who underwent radical prostatectomy at our institution with known fami

111 te cancer samples from patients treated with radical prostatectomy at three academic institutions wer

112 hs for suspected prostate cancer followed by radical prostatectomy between April 2016 and July 2018.

113 mapped all patients in England who underwent radical prostatectomy between Jan 1, 2010, and Dec 31, 2

114 ) who underwent endorectal MR imaging before radical prostatectomy between January 2007 and April 201

115 a who underwent 3-T MRI and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy between June 2018 and January 2019

116 GFB] in six nonrecurrent and seven recurrent radical prostatectomy cases.

117 d the effect of being an established robotic radical prostatectomy centre at the start of 2010 on net

118 For each radical prostatectomy centre we analysed the effect of h

119 Of the 65 radical prostatectomy centres open at the start of the s

120 Radical prostatectomy centres that closed were more like

121 KDM5C expression patterns in two independent radical prostatectomy cohorts (822 prostate tumors in to

122 Among the 404 men who underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy, combined biopsy was associated wi

123 se in groin hernia repair was observed after radical prostatectomy compared with controls, and men wh

124 s, the adjusted mean sexual domain score for radical prostatectomy decreased more than for EBRT (mean

125 iate analysis, men with adverse pathology at radical prostatectomy demonstrated lower median serum 25

126 ng soy protein isolate for 2 years following radical prostatectomy did not reduce biochemical recurre

127 etected during the early era of PSA testing, radical prostatectomy did not significantly reduce all-c

128 .0 years, 171 of 364 men (47.0%) assigned to radical prostatectomy died, as compared with 183 of 367

129 he Nationwide Inpatient Sample who underwent radical prostatectomy during MIRP diffusion between Janu

130 l enhanced) and nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, during which IFS analysis was use

131 d high-grade prostate epithelial tissue from radical prostatectomies, each with its immediately surro

132 Treatment with radical prostatectomy, EBRT, or active surveillance was

133 fers high detection rates in early BCR after radical prostatectomy, especially among patients with lo

134 combination treatment increases apoptosis in radical prostatectomy ex vivo explant samples.

135 outcomes and adverse effects associated with radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy (

136 ith direct costs of immediate treatment with radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy,

137 To compare quality of life (QOL) after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy, and b

138 Treatment with radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy, brach

139 T in patients with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (PCa).

140 ctable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer and identify a

141 The optimal timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer is uncertain.

142 onformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and open radical prostatectomy for treating prostate cancer.

143 rostate cancer among individuals who undergo radical prostatectomy for treatment is around 25%.

144 t trend in shifting the standard of care for radical prostatectomy from an open to a robotic-assisted

145 e has been a changing trend in technique for radical prostatectomy from open surgery to minimally inv

146 ore, 52.3 vs 65.2, P < .001) than men in the radical prostatectomy group.

147 One man died after surgery in the radical-prostatectomy group.

148 most patients with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy had foci of suggestive uptake, eve

149 progress in improving potency outcomes after radical prostatectomy has been achieved due to a better

150 Salvage radical prostatectomy has been described in a small seri

151 e established modalities of radiotherapy and radical prostatectomy has been explored in this context,

152 of radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy have been assessed, including qual

153 Patient-reported outcomes after radical prostatectomy have focused on erectile function.

154 Superlative survival expectations following radical prostatectomy have shifted the paradigm of asses

155 shorter time to biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (hazard ratio (HR) 5.0, 95% confid

156 counted for 10.4% (95% CI, 10.2-10.7) of all radical prostatectomies in the United States.

157 compared PSI incidence between MIRP and open radical prostatectomy in each year during the study.

158 versus early salvage radiotherapy, following radical prostatectomy in men (age >=18 years) with inter

159 t material-enhanced imaging) obtained before radical prostatectomy in patients between September 2008

160 chemical recurrence of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy in patients with low prostate-spec

161 In total, 190 men underwent radical prostatectomy in the cohort.

162 ose at the highest risk for recurrence after radical prostatectomy include men with seminal vesicle i

163 gnificantly associated with recurrence after radical prostatectomy including NuSAP, a protein that bi

164 Radical prostatectomy is an acceptable treatment alterat

165 recurrence risk of prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy is critical for determining whethe

166 Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is eclipsing open radical prostate

167 vant or early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy is more appropriate for men who pr

168 y placement of a penile prosthesis following radical prostatectomy is now a proven and viable option.

169 stasis and treatment failure in men for whom radical prostatectomy is planned.

170 ty men treated consecutively by laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) between July 2014 and Januar

171 lesion (primary tumor or prostate bed after radical prostatectomy), lymph node metastases, and other

172 Patients with biochemical failure (BF) after radical prostatectomy may benefit from dose-intensified

173 c surgeries, such as partial nephrectomy and radical prostatectomy may soon incorporate IGS.

174 d laparoscopic or robotic minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) are costlier alternatives t

175 (n = 118,407), hysterectomy (n = 26,639), or radical prostatectomy (n = 11,183).

176 ing after primary local therapies, including radical prostatectomy (n = 38), radiation (n = 27) or co

177 ing after primary local therapies, including radical prostatectomy (n = 38), radiation (n = 27), or a

178 ents with regional lymph node involvement at radical prostatectomy often experience disease progressi

179 s calculated for a group of men treated with radical prostatectomy (open and minimally invasive) and

180 tate cancer and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy or curative-intent radiotherapy we

181 d early in the study period or who underwent radical prostatectomy or endocrine therapy exhibited sli

182 rm urinary, bowel, and sexual function after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy

183 nsity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), or radical prostatectomy or followed up by active surveilla

184 median PSA value, 7.8 ng per milliliter) to radical prostatectomy or observation and followed them t

185 ed 731 men with localized prostate cancer to radical prostatectomy or observation.

186 incidence of groin hernia repair seen after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy for prostate

187 Regardless of radical treatment type (radical prostatectomy or radical radiotherapy), increasi

188 with indolent prostate cancer often opt for radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy treatment for thei

189 gainst an accurate sampling strategy such as radical prostatectomy or transperineal prostate mapping

190 OR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.37-0.53]; P < .001), and radical prostatectomy (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.25-0.61]; P <

191 y, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, or radical prostatectomy) or observation (active surveillan

192 o active monitoring (surveillance strategy), radical prostatectomy, or three-dimensional conformal ex

193 scopic prostatectomy (RALP) compared to open radical prostatectomy (ORP) for prostate cancer.

194 sisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP), we sought to re-examine the

195 with a robot and the change in the number of radical prostatectomies (P<0.0001).

196 Compared with radical prostatectomy patients (n = 201), radiation-ther

197 oorer hormone-related symptoms compared with radical prostatectomy patients (P < .05).

198 ngs were compared with histology findings in radical prostatectomy patients undergoing PLND.

199 A cohort of radical prostatectomy patients was stratified into men w

200 ogress achieved in the surgical technique of radical prostatectomy, post-operative complications such

201 re of prostate cancer is the primary goal of radical prostatectomy, preserving erectile function is a

202 he following 3 inclusion criteria: BCR after radical prostatectomy (pT2-pT4 pN0-pN1 cM0, postoperativ

203 SE OF REVIEW: The advent of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy purported fewer complications incl

204 ET/CT in men who were initially managed with radical prostatectomy, radiation treatment, or both and

205 e and clinical stage) and by treatment type (radical prostatectomy, radical radiotherapy, androgen de

206 =10 ng/mL) for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT).

207 f randomized trials comparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatect

208 SA] values after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy [RARP]).

209 Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among men with l

210 Radical prostatectomy, regardless of the technology used

211 acquire a robotic facility and the rates of radical prostatectomy relative to the prevalence of robo

212 total of 187 patients had undergone primary radical prostatectomy (RP) (79/187 had secondary radioth

213 oup [GG] >= 3, >= pT3a) in men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) after initial surveillance.

214 Radical prostatectomy (RP) alone is often inadequate in

215 We assessed the effect of radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiotherap

216 prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after radical prostatectomy (RP) fail prostate fossa (PF) salv

217 mes for salvage radiotherapy (SRT) following radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer, includin

218 ring it with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and radical prostatectomy (RP) histopathology.

219 out abiraterone and prednisone (ELAP) before radical prostatectomy (RP) in men with locally advanced

220 ing of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) after radical prostatectomy (RP) is unclear.

221 sion (CCP) score, in predicting contemporary radical prostatectomy (RP) outcomes.

222 st in an independent, blinded cohort of post-radical prostatectomy (RP) patients.

223 35 nonmalignant prostate tissue samples, 293 radical prostatectomy (RP) samples (cohort 1, training),

224 rachytherapy (LDR) alone, EBRT alone, and/or radical prostatectomy (RP) should be offered to eligible

225 rostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure after radical prostatectomy (RP) to triage those who will bene

226 urrence (BCR) of prostate cancer (PCa) after radical prostatectomy (RP) using composite validation.

227 aluated for variation in prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy (RP) volume.

228 e study comprised 605 patients, treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) with curative intent for PCa

229 tissue specimens from 239 men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP), and it was investigated if m

230 n men with biochemical recurrence (BCR) post radical prostatectomy (RP), but its longer term prognost

231 men with biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP), but its longer-term prognost

232 logic and biochemical outcomes after delayed radical prostatectomy (RP), using descriptive statistics

233 ere candidates for AS but elected to undergo radical prostatectomy (RP).

234 ging (pT) of prostate cancer (PCa) following radical prostatectomy (RP).

235 total of 187 patients had undergone primary radical prostatectomy (RP; 79/187 had secondary radiothe

236 d robotic centres and ten (27%) closed their radical prostatectomy service during the study period.

237 idence), and the likelihood of closing their radical prostatectomy service.

238 Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy shows equivalent and possibly bett

239 Inclusion criteria were radical prostatectomy specimen TZ cancer larger than 0.5

240 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded first-line radical prostatectomy specimens (embedded in tissue micr

241 cent G3 and Gleason pattern 4 (G4) tumors in radical prostatectomy specimens and found that all were

242 Naive radical prostatectomy specimens from 535 patients was us

243 t [MSKCC] cohort) and 117 (Cambridge cohort) radical prostatectomy specimens from low-risk to high-ri

244 trast and subcellular detail, obtained in 24 radical prostatectomy specimens immediately after excisi

245 roarrays comprising >1500 primary PC patient radical prostatectomy specimens reveals that CCN3 expres

246 Histopathologic examination of whole-mount radical prostatectomy specimens was used as the referenc

247 NA from 70 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded radical prostatectomy specimens with known long-term out

248 From 197 patients with radical prostatectomy specimens, 28 patients with TZ can

249 mediate-, and high-risk prostate cancer from radical prostatectomy specimens.

250 on tumor tissue microarrays constructed from radical prostatectomy specimens.

251 primary tumor prostate tissues derived from radical prostatectomy specimens.

252 phenomenologic assessment of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy surgical quality does not exist, b

253 We evaluate recently reported robot-assisted radical prostatectomy surgical techniques aimed at limit

254 CT offers high detection rates for BCR after radical prostatectomy that are comparable to or better t

255 d a substantial reduction in mortality after radical prostatectomy; the number needed to treat to pre

256 erectile function during a robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, there must be a detailed understa

257 In this cohort of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy, those with first-degree relatives

258 histopathological grades between biopsy and radical prostatectomy, three hundred and thirty men trea

259 urveillance for low-risk cancer; restricting radical prostatectomy to high-volume surgeons; and using

260 ned from diseased prostates after removal by radical prostatectomy to identify potential immunoregula

261 c survival was computed as the interval from radical prostatectomy to PCa-specific death.

262 were referred for (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT before radical prostatectomy to rule out metastasis.

263 s involves a conceptual paradigm shift from 'radical' prostatectomy to neurosurgery of the prostate.

264 ohort study of 221637 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy, total nephrectomy, partial nephre

265 in the UK who were incontinent 6 weeks after radical prostatectomy (trial 1) or transurethral resecti

266 tients with biochemically recurrent PC after radical prostatectomy undergoing (18)F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT

267 After radical prostatectomy, upgrades to grade group 3 or high

268 Among the men who underwent subsequent radical prostatectomy, upgrading and downgrading of grad

269 se the accuracy of prognostication following radical prostatectomy using formalin-fixed specimens.

270 vernous nerve (CN) network for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy using near-infrared cyanine voltag

271 The median age at radical prostatectomy was 62 years.

272 The median interval after radical prostatectomy was 8.9 y (95% confidence interval

273 ohort of men with localized prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy was associated with a greater decr

274 However, radical prostatectomy was associated with a reduced risk

275 Radical prostatectomy was associated with reduced all-ca

276 Radical prostatectomy was associated with worse urinary

277 incontinence persisting 1 to 17 years after radical prostatectomy was conducted at a university and

278 a standardized institutional protocol before radical prostatectomy was performed by using the same 1.

279 patients who underwent MP MR imaging before radical prostatectomy was retrospectively used.

280 More radical prostatectomies were performed in areas where th

281 Significantly more radical prostatectomies were performed in hospitals with

282 cademic centers, 251 patients with BCR after radical prostatectomy were evaluated in a retrospective

283 parametric MR imaging of the prostate before radical prostatectomy were included in a prospective dat

284 prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels after radical prostatectomy were included in this retrospectiv

285 ging, with a pelvic phased-array coil before radical prostatectomy were included.

286 thods: Study 1: 9 PCa patients scheduled for radical prostatectomy were included.

287 h prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy) were prospectively selected for t

288 er biochemical recurrence localisation after radical prostatectomy, whereas European Association of U

289 , 0.62 [95% CI, 0.56-0.68]) when determining radical prostatectomy, while regional variation (OR, 0.5

290 ecific survival in PCa patients treated with radical prostatectomy who develop biochemical failure du

291 study included 195 PCa patients treated with radical prostatectomy who underwent (11)C-choline PET/CT

292 secutive patients with noncastrate BCR after radical prostatectomy who underwent (18)F-rhPSMA-7 PET/C

293 PCa early biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy with (68)Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in pati

294 and the patient underwent a robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy with bilateral pelvic lymphadenect

295 dal and distant metastases in patients after radical prostatectomy with biochemical failure.

296 t pelvic (99m)Tc-trofolastat SPECT/CT before radical prostatectomy with extended pelvic LN dissection

297 past 10-15 years have shown increased use of radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection

298 adaptations of the conventional approach to radical prostatectomy with the aim of preserving contine

299 atients with prostate adenocarcinoma who had radical prostatectomy (with or without postoperative rad

300 s who underwent nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy without multiparametric MR imaging