scholarly journals PEG-coated and Gd-loaded fluorescent silica nanoparticles for targeted prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging and fluorescence imaging

2019 ◽  
Vol Volume 14 ◽  
pp. 5611-5622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Jiang ◽  
Huiying Fang ◽  
Fengqiu Liu ◽  
Xue Zhou ◽  
Hongyun Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Silica Nanoparticles ◽  
Fluorescence Imaging ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Fluorescent Silica Nanoparticles

scholarly journals Mesoporous silica nanoparticles for 19F magnetic resonance imaging, fluorescence imaging, and drug delivery

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 1986-1990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatsuya Nakamura ◽  
Fuminori Sugihara ◽  
Hisashi Matsushita ◽  
Yoshichika Yoshioka ◽  
Shin Mizukami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Drug Delivery ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Mesoporous Silica ◽  
Silica Nanoparticles ◽  
Fluorescence Imaging ◽  
Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
19F Magnetic Resonance Imaging

We described perfluorocarbon encapsulated in mesoporous silica nanoparticles which enabled dual modal imaging (NIR/19F MRI) and drug delivery.

Naive patients with suspicious prostate cancer and positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI): is it time for fusion target biopsy alone?

2021 ◽  
pp. 205141582110237
Author(s):  
Enrico Checcucci ◽  
Sabrina De Cillis ◽  
Daniele Amparore ◽  
Diletta Garrou ◽  
Roberta Aimar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Grade Group ◽  
Final Pathology ◽  
Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Clinically Significant

Objectives: To determine if standard biopsy still has a role in the detection of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients with positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Materials and methods: We extracted, from our prospective maintained fusion biopsy database, patients from March 2014 to December 2018. The detection rate of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer and complication rate were analysed in a cohort of patients who underwent fusion biopsy alone (group A) or fusion biopsy plus standard biopsy (group B). The International Society of Urological Pathology grade group determined on prostate biopsy with the grade group determined on final pathology among patients who underwent radical prostatectomy were compared. Results: Prostate cancer was found in 249/389 (64.01%) and 215/337 (63.8%) patients in groups A and B, respectively ( P=0.98), while the clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate was 57.8% and 55.1% ( P=0.52). No significant differences in complications were found. No differences in the upgrading rate between biopsy and final pathology finding after radical prostatectomy were recorded. Conclusions: In biopsy-naive patients, with suspected prostate cancer and positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging the addition of standard biopsy to fusion biopsy did not increase significantly the detection rate of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer. Moreover, the rate of upgrading of the cancer grade group between biopsy and final pathology was not affected by the addition of standard biopsy. Level of evidence: Not applicable for this multicentre audit.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document