Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Aug 24:7:F1000 Faculty Rev-1337.
doi: 10.12688/f1000research.14498.1. eCollection 2018.

Advances in prostate cancer imaging

Matthew R Tangel  1 , Ardeshir R Rastinehad  2
Affiliations
Review

Advances in prostate cancer imaging

Matthew R Tangel et al. F1000Res. .

Abstract

Many exciting advances in medical imaging have been made in recent years that will alter the way we diagnose, stage, and treat patients with prostate cancer. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is emerging as the main modality for prostate cancer imaging. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and shear wave elastography may be strong alternatives in patients who cannot undergo MRI. Prostate-specific membrane antigen-directed positron emission tomography/computed tomography has proven to be valuable in the primary staging of high-risk disease and for detecting disease in patients with biochemical recurrence. As more studies continue to emerge, it is becoming clear that the standard algorithm for diagnosing and staging prostate cancer will undergo significant changes in the near future.

Keywords: Multiparametric MRI; PSMA-PET/CT; Prostate cancer; Ultrasound elastography.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No competing interests were disclosed.No competing interests were disclosed.No competing interests were disclosed.No competing interests were disclosed.

References

    1. Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Pelzer A, et al. : Ultrasound of prostate cancer: recent advances. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(4):707–15. 10.1007/s00330-007-0779-7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Djavan B, Ravery V, Zlotta A, et al. : Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: When should we stop? J Urol. 2001;166(5):1679–83. 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65652-2 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barzell WE, Melamed MR: Appropriate patient selection in the focal treatment of prostate cancer: The role of transperineal 3-dimensional pathologic mapping of the prostate--a 4-year experience. Urology. 2007;70(6 Suppl):27–35. 10.1016/j.urology.2007.06.1126 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pepe P, Aragona F: Morbidity after transperineal prostate biopsy in 3000 patients undergoing 12 vs 18 vs more than 24 needle cores. Urology. 2013;81(6):1142–6. 10.1016/j.urology.2013.02.019 - DOI - PubMed
    1. 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):815–22. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1 - DOI - PubMed

    2. F1000 Recommendation