64 / 86
64
Ces Urol 2016; 20(1): 57–64
ORIGINÁLNÍ PRÁCE
13. Mertens K, Ham H, Deblaere K, et al.
Distribution patterns of 18F-labelled fluoromethylcholine in
normal structures and tumors of the head: a PET/MRI evaluation. Clin Nucl Med 2010; 37: 196–203.
14. Chondrogiannis S, Marzola MC, Grassetto G, et al.
New acquisition protocol of 18F-choline PET/CT
in prostate cancer patients: review of the literature about methodology and proposal of standardization.
BioMed Research International, 2014, article ID 215650, 10 pages.
15. Schillaci O, Calabria F, Tavolozza M, et al.
18F-choline PET/CT physiological distribution and pitfalls in
image interpretation: experience in 80 patients with prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2010; 31(1): 39–45.
16. Husarik DB, Miralbell R, Dubs M, et al.
Evaluation of [(18)F]-choline PET/CT for staging and restaging
of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35: 253–263.
17. Igerc I, Kohlfurst S, Gallowitsch HJ, et al.
The value of 18F-choline PET/CT in patients with elevated
PSA-level and negative prostate needle biopsy for localisation of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol
Imaging 2008; 35: 976–983.
18. Kwee SA, Coel MN, Lim J, Ko JP.
Prostate cancer localization with 18fluorine fluorocholine positron
emission tomography. J Urol 2005; 173: 252–255.
19. Kwee SA, Thibault GP, Stack RS, et al.
Use of step-section histopathology to evaluate 18F-fluorocholine
PET sextant localization of prostate cancer. Mol Imaging 2008; 7: 12–20.
20. Lee AG, Choi Yh, Cho SY, Cho IR.
A prospective study of reducing unnecessary prostate bipsy in
patiens with high serum prostate-specific antigen with consideration of prostatic inflammation. Korean
J Urol 2012; 53: 50–53.
21. 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: 1679–1783.
22. Bott SRJ, Young MPA, Kellett MJ, Parkinson MC.
Anterior prostate cancer: is it more difficult to dia‑
gnose? BJU Int 2002; 89: 886–889.
23. Bouyé S, Potiron E, Puech P, Leroy X, Lemaitre L, Villers A.
Transition zone and anterior stromal pro‑
state cancers: Zone of origins and intraprostatic patterns of spread at histopatology. The Prostate 2009;
69: 105–113.
24. Röthke M, Blondin D, Schlemmer HP, Franiel T.
PI-RADS classification: structured reporting for MRI
of the prostate. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2013; 185 (3): 253–261.
25. Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, et al.
Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation,
and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from aEuropean consensus meeting. Eur Urol
2011; 4: 477–494.
26. Šobrová E, Eret V, Dolejšová O, et al.
Komparace multiparametrické magnetické rezonance se silou mag‑
netického pole 3 Tesla s transrektální sonografií naváděnou biopsií prostaty. Ces Urol 2014; 18(3): 225–233.
27. Namimoto T, Morishita S, Saitoh R, et al.
The value of dynamic MR imaging for hypointensity lesions
of the peripheral zone of the prostate. Comput Med Imaging Graph 1998; 22(3): 239–245.
28. Schwarzenböck S, Souvatzouglou M, Krause BJ.
Choline PET and PET/CT in primary diagnosis and
paging of prostate cancer. Theranostics 2012; 2(3): 318–330.
29. Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, et al.
Evaluation of Hybrid 68Ga-PSMA-Ligand PET/CT in 248
Patients with Biochemical Recurrence after Radical Prostatectomy. J Nucl Med 2015; 56: 668–674.