ライフサイエンスコーパス: endorectal

1 y corrected for the reception profile of the endorectal and pelvic phased-array coils, aligned with t

2 y corrected for the reception profile of the endorectal and pelvic phased-array coils.

3 ed with use of the single-channel inflatable endorectal balloon coil.

4 Patients were treatment-naive with endorectal coil 3-T multiparametric MR imaging.

5 with varying experience in interpretation of endorectal coil images of the prostate gland.

6 tiparametric MR images were acquired with an endorectal coil in 48 patients with prostate cancer (med

7 Multiparametric MR imaging with endorectal coil is superior for the detection of local r

8 Patients underwent both phased-array coil-endorectal coil MR imaging and three-dimensional MR spec

9 The authors propose incorporation of endorectal coil MR imaging in the diagnostic paradigm of

10 d prostate cancer who underwent preoperative endorectal coil MR imaging of the prostate and subsequen

11 carcinoma staged by endorectal ultrasound or endorectal coil MRI, measuring less than 4 cm in greates

12 ent DW imaging during 3-T MR imaging with an endorectal coil were included in this retrospective inst

13 ntrast-enhanced MR imaging, obtained without endorectal coil within 34 minutes 19 seconds.

14 e PET/CT and multiparametric MR imaging with endorectal coil.

15 prostate motion and deformation from the MRI endorectal coil.

16 vic phased-array coil in combination with an endorectal coil.

17 ing a combination of six-channel cardiac and endorectal coils.

18 ith CG carcinoma) who underwent preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and radical p

19 Endorectal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is helpful fo

20 Endorectal MR and 3D MR spectroscopic imaging were perfo

21 60 years; range, 46-71 years) who underwent endorectal MR and MR spectroscopic imaging before radica

22 Ninety-nine men who underwent endorectal MR and MR spectroscopy before external-beam r

23 Forty-two patients underwent endorectal MR at 1.5 T before undergoing radical prostat

24 nt increase in area under the ROC curve with endorectal MR images interpreted by genitourinary MR ima

25 Preoperative 1.5-T multiparametric endorectal MR images of 119 PC patients (dataset A, 71 p

26 Endorectal MR images were retrospectively and independen

27 Endorectal MR images were reviewed retrospectively in 82

28 e significantly associated with SVI (P<.02); endorectal MR imaging (0.76) had a larger area under the

29 The Kattan nomogram plus endorectal MR imaging (0.87) had a significantly larger

30 n patients with prostate carcinoma underwent endorectal MR imaging after cryosurgery.

31 significantly larger (P<.05) AUC than either endorectal MR imaging alone (0.76) or the Kattan nomogra

32 and November 1, 2004, 229 patients underwent endorectal MR imaging and 383 underwent combined endorec

33 Endorectal MR imaging and 3D MR spectroscopic imaging we

34 Combined phased-array, endorectal MR imaging and 3D MRSI was performed in nine

35 Endorectal MR imaging and combined endorectal MR imaging

36 ndings in 40 patients who underwent combined endorectal MR imaging and hydrogen 1 MR spectroscopic im

37 s) with biopsy-proved PCa underwent combined endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging befor

38 years; age range, 40-74 years) who underwent endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging betwe

39 Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging findi

40 level, or the presence of apparent tumor at endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging for e

41 Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging were

42 Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging were

43 Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging were

44 Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging were

45 prostate cancer, who had undergone baseline endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging, and

46 er detection of prostate cancer nodules with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging, but

47 sy-proved prostate cancer underwent combined endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging.

48 detection in each side of the prostate with endorectal MR imaging and spectroscopic imaging at diffe

49 8.3 years; age range, 36-86 years) underwent endorectal MR imaging before prostate cancer surgery.

50 ars; range, 42-72 years) who underwent 1.5-T endorectal MR imaging before radical prostatectomy and w

51 68 years; range, 43-75 years) who underwent endorectal MR imaging before radical prostatectomy betwe

52 ange, 40-76 years) without SVI who underwent endorectal MR imaging before radical prostatectomy betwe

53 7.5 years; range, 32-72 years) who underwent endorectal MR imaging before radical prostatectomy, with

54 tomography (CT) and multiparametric (MP) 3-T endorectal MR imaging before robotic-assisted prostatect

55 Endorectal MR imaging can be used to evaluate seed distr

56 The addition of endorectal MR imaging contributes significant incrementa

57 up of patients, area under the ROC curve for endorectal MR imaging findings (0.646) was not larger th

58 up of patients, area under the ROC curve for endorectal MR imaging findings (0.833) was larger than a

59 of cancer in all core biopsy specimens, and endorectal MR imaging findings (P =.001, P =.001, and P

60 el containing only clinical variables; thus, endorectal MR imaging findings add incremental value in

61 Endorectal MR imaging findings are significant predictor

62 At ROC univariate analysis, endorectal MR imaging findings had the largest area unde

63 A model containing endorectal MR imaging findings has a significantly large

64 ctors and another with all predictors except endorectal MR imaging findings, demonstrated a significa

65 r ROC curve for two models, with and without endorectal MR imaging findings, were 0.838 and 0.772, re

66 el that included the clinical variables plus endorectal MR imaging findings.

67 with biopsy-proved prostate cancer underwent endorectal MR imaging followed by prostatectomy.

68 with biopsy-proved prostate cancer underwent endorectal MR imaging followed by surgery.

69 Endorectal MR imaging following radiation therapy can he

70 ficantly improves the diagnostic accuracy of endorectal MR imaging in the detection of locally recurr

71 e (AUCs) were used to assess the accuracy of endorectal MR imaging in tumor detection and determinati

72 Endorectal MR imaging is accurate in demonstrating SVI p

73 59 years; range, 47-75 years) who underwent endorectal MR imaging of the prostate prior to external-

74 998, and October 31, 2004, and who underwent endorectal MR imaging prior to surgery.

75 with biopsy-proved prostate cancer underwent endorectal MR imaging prior to surgery; 216 of these pat

76 At univariate analysis, endorectal MR imaging results and all clinical variables

77 The endorectal MR imaging results had been prospectively int

78 At multivariate analysis, endorectal MR imaging results, Gleason grade, PSA level,

79 Endorectal MR imaging was performed in 35 consecutive pa

80 ggest that MR spectroscopic imaging, but not endorectal MR imaging, may be of value for the depiction

81 Sixty-four men who underwent endorectal MR imaging, MR spectroscopic imaging, and tra

82 rectal MR imaging and 383 underwent combined endorectal MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging before ra

83 preoperatively, and underwent combined 1.5-T endorectal MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging between J

84 Endorectal MR imaging and combined endorectal MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging contribut

85 rostatectomy, the accuracy of combined 1.5-T endorectal MR imaging-MR spectroscopic imaging for sexta

86 d to assess the accuracy of detecting SVI at endorectal MR imaging.

87 On the MR images and combined endorectal MR-MR spectroscopic images, two radiologists

88 (23 men, 18 women) were randomized to either endorectal mucosectomy and handsewn IPAA or to double-st

89 imen TZ cancer larger than 0.5 cm(3) and 3-T endorectal presurgery MP MR imaging (T2-weighted imaging

90 t 3D imaging of the prostate gland with a 3D endorectal probe following conventional two-dimensional

91 A side-fire endorectal probe was inserted into the vagina and direct

92 ed by using combined pelvic phased-array and endorectal probe.

93 6.2 years +/- 6.9) underwent multiparametric endorectal prostate MR imaging at 3 T and transperineal

94 Three-dimensional endorectal prostatic US appears to be clinically feasibl

95 ptember 1999, 78 infants underwent a primary endorectal pull-through (ERPT) procedure at four pediatr

96 on and quality of life (QoL) after transanal endorectal pull-through (TEPT) for Hirschsprung disease

97 on and quality of life (QoL) after transanal endorectal pull-through (TEPT) for Hirschsprung disease

98 es to in vivo MR images acquired by using an endorectal receive coil was sufficiently accurate for co

99 bilization is performed transanally using an endorectal sleeve technique.

100 m two sources, and all were obtained with an endorectal surface coil.

101 ents deemed suitable for preoperative CMT by endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) may be overstaged.

102 We prospectively accrued 109 patients with endorectal ultrasound (ERUS)-staged, locally advanced re

103 The advent of accurate endorectal ultrasound and MRI staging has allowed the us

104 Preoperative staging by endorectal ultrasound did not influence local recurrence

105 linical T2N0 rectal adenocarcinoma staged by endorectal ultrasound or endorectal coil MRI, measuring

106 ly advanced (stage II/III) disease (noted on endorectal ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging) who

107 Of those staged before surgery with endorectal ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging, 57%

108 tients with stage II and III rectal cancers (endorectal ultrasound staged uT3-4 and/or uN1) located <

109 adenocarcinoma staged T2 by clinical and/or endorectal ultrasound who were judged by the operating s

110 of penetration (T stage) was determined with endorectal US and correlated with the histopathologic fi

111 determining the specific T stage may occur, endorectal US facilitates surgical planning in the vast

112 tection of residual tumor after polypectomy, endorectal US had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of

113 Endoscopic and endorectal US have added a new dimension to the assessme

114 precise T stage was correctly predicted with endorectal US in only eight patients (44%), endorectal U

115 Endorectal US is an accurate technique for localizing tu

116 endorectal US in only eight patients (44%), endorectal US was able to demonstrate whether the tumor

117 Before surgical resection, endorectal US was performed in 18 consecutive patients w