Timo Soeterik

24 CHAPTER 1 21. Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Stapleton AMF, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst . 1998;90:766-771. 22. Cagiannos I, Karakiewicz P, Eastham JA, et al. A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol . 2003;170:1798-1803. 23. Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F, et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: The essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol . 2012;61:480-487. 24. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Pre-radical prostatectomy tool to predict probability of lymph node involvement in prostate cancer patients. www.mskcc.org/ nomograms/prostate/pre_op. Published 2018. Accessed December 21, 2020. 25. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Suardi N, Kattan MW. Comparison of nomograms with other methods for predicting outcomes in prostate cancer: A critical analysis of the literature. Clin Cancer Res . 2008;14:4400-4407. 26. Capitanio U, Briganti A, Gallina A, et al. Predictive models before and after radical prostatectomy. Prostate . 2010;70:1371-1378. 27. Hricak H, Williams RD, Spring DB, et al. Anatomy and pathology of the male pelvis by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Roentgenol . 1983;141:1101-1110. 28. Hoeks CMA, Barentsz JO, Hambrock T, et al. Prostate cancer: Multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology . 2011;261:46-66. 29. Oberlin DT, Casalino DD, Miller FH, Meeks JJ. Dramatic increase in the utilization of mult iparametric magnet ic resonance imaging for detection and management of prostate cancer. Abdom Radiol . 2017;42:1255-1258. 30. 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;389:815-822. 31. Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, et al. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med . 2018:1767-1777. 32. van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israël B, et al. Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy- naïve Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study. Eur Urol . 2019;75:570-578. 33. McClure TD, Margolis DJA, Reiter RE, et al. Use of MR imaging to determine preservation of the neurovascular bundles at robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Radiology . 2012;262:874-883. 34. Nguyen LN, Head L, Witiuk K, et al. The Risks and Benefits of Cavernous Neurovascular Bundle Sparing during Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol . 2017;198:760-769. 35. de Rooij M, Hamoen EHJ, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM. Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis. Eur Urol . 2016;70:233-245. 36. Grossfeld GD, Chang JJ, Broering JM, et al. Under staging and under grading in a contemporary series of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: results from the cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor database. J Urol . 2001;165:851-856. 37. Paner GP, Stadler WM, Hansel DE, Montironi R, Lin DW, Amin MB. Updates in the Eighth Edition of the Tumor-Node-Metastasis Staging Classification for Urologic Cancers. Eur Urol . 2018;73:560-569. 38. Campbell JM, Raymond E, O’Callaghan ME, et al. Optimum Tools for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review of Prognostic Accuracy and Val idity. Clin Genitourin Cancer . 2017;15:e827-e834.