• 1
    Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Cancer control and quality of life following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy: Results at 10 years. J. Urol. 1994; 152: 18316.
  • 2
    Burkhard FC, Kessler TM, Fleischmann A, Thalmann GN, Schumacher M, Studer UE. Nerve sparing open radical retropubic prostatectomy – does it have an impact on urinary continence? J. Urol. 2006; 176: 18995.
  • 3
    Sacco E, Prayer-Galetti T, Pinto F et al. Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: Incidence by definition, risk factors and temporal trend in a large series with a long-term follow-up. BJU Int. 2006; 97: 123441.
  • 4
    Ohori M, Kattan MW, Koh H et al. Predicting the presence and side of extracapsular extension: A nomogram for staging prostate cancer. J. Urol. 2004; 71: 18449.
  • 5
    Naya Y, Slaton JW, Troncoso P, Okihara K, Babaian RJ. Tumor length and location of cancer on biopsy predict for side-specific extraprostatic cancer extension. J. Urol. 2004; 171: 10937.
  • 6
    Tsuzuki T, Hernandez DJ, Aydin H, Trock B, Walsh PC, Epstein JI. Prediction of extraprostatic extension in the neurovascular bundle based on prostate needle biopsy pathology, serum prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination. J. Urol. 2005; 173: 4503.
  • 7
    Kamat AM, Jacobsohn KM, Troncoso P, Shen Y, Wen S, Babaian RJ. Validation of criteria used to predict extraprostatic cancer extension: A tool for use in selecting patients for nerve sparing radical prostatectomy. J. Urol. 2005; 174: 12625.
  • 8
    Elabbady AA, Khedr MM. Extended 12-core prostate biopsy increases both the detection of prostate cancer and the accuracy of Gleason score. Eur. Urol. 2006; 49: 4953.
  • 9
    Kawakami S, Hyochi N, Yonese J et al. Three-dimensional combination of transrectal and transperineal biopsies for efficient detection of stage T1c prostate cancer. Int. J. Clin. Oncol. 2006; 11: 12732.
  • 10
    Kawakami S, Okuno T, Yonese J et al. Optimal sampling sites for repeat prostate biopsy: A recursive partitioning analysis of three-dimensional 26-core systematic biopsy. Eur. Urol. 2007; 51: 67582.
  • 11
    Kawakami S, Yamamoto S, Numao N, Ishikawa Y, Kazunori K, Fukui I. Direct comparison between transrectal and transperineal extended prostate biopsy for the detection of cancer. Int. J. Urol. 2007; 14: 71924.
  • 12
    Numao N, Kawakami S, Yokoyama M et al. Improved accuracy in predicting the presence of Gleason pattern 4/5 prostate cancer by three-dimensional 26-core systematic biopsy. Eur. Urol. 2007; 52: 16638.
  • 13
    Eichler K, Hempel S, Wilby J, Myers L, Bachmann LM, Kleijnen J. Diagnostic value of systematic biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate cancer: A systematic review. J. Urol. 2006; 160512.
  • 14
    Ochiai A, Trpkov K, Yilmaz A, Donnelly B, Babaian RJ. Validation of a prediction model for low volume/low grade cancer: Application in selecting patients for active surveillance. J. Urol. 2007; 177: 90710.
  • 15
    Singh H, Canto EI, Shariat SF et al. Six additional systematic lateral cores enhance sextant biopsy prediction of pathological features at radical prostatectomy. J. Urol. 2004; 171: 2049.
  • 16
    Naya Y, Ochiai A, Troncoso P, Babaian RJ. A comparison of extended biopsy and sextant biopsy schemes for predicting the pathological stage of prostate cancer. J. Urol. 2004; 171: 22038.
  • 17
    Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, LL E; ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2005; 29: 122842.
  • 18
    Srigley JR, Amin MB, Epstein JI et al. Updated protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the prostate gland. Arch. Pathol Lab. Med. 2006; 130: 93646.
  • 19
    NCCN Practice Guideline in Oncology – Prostate Cancer Early Detection. V.2.2007. [Cited 15 Dec 2007.] Available from URL:
  • 20
    Makarov DV, Sanderson H, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: Is the prognostic difference in Gleason scores 4 + 3 and 3 + 4 independent of the number of involved cores? J. Urol. 2002; 167: 24402.
  • 21
    Makarov DV, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB et al. Updated nomogram to predict pathologic stage of prostate cancer given prostate-specific antigen level, clinical stage, and biopsy Gleason score (Partin tables) based on cases from 2000 to 2005. Urology 2007; 69: 1095101.
  • 22
    Ochiai A, Troncoso P, Chen ME, Lloreta J, Babaian RJ. The relationship between tumor volume and the number of positive cores in men undergoing multisite extended biopsy: Implication for expectant management. J. Urol. 2005; 174: 21648.
  • 23
    Egevad L, Norberg M, Mattson S, Norlén BJ, Busch C. Estimation of prostate cancer volume by multiple core biopsies before radical prostatectomy. Urology 1998; 52: 6538.