Search

Your search keyword '"Futterer, J. J."' showing total 10 results
Start Over Author "Futterer, J. J."
10 results on '"Futterer, J. J."'

2. Utilization of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging in clinical practice and focal therapy: report from a Delphi consensus project

Author

Scheltema, M. J., Tay, K. J., Postema, A. W., de Bruin, D. M., Feller, J., Futterer, J. J., George, A. K., Gupta, R. T., Kahmann, F., Kastner, C., Laguna, M. P., Natarajan, S., Rais-Bahrami, S., Rastinehad, A. R., de Reijke, T. M., Salomon, G., Stone, N., van Velthoven, R., Villani, R., Villers, A., Walz, J., Polascik, T. J., and de la Rosette, J. J. M. C. H.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. Definitions of Computer-Assisted Surgery and Intervention, Image-Guided Surgery and Intervention, Hybrid Operating Room, and Guidance Systems: Strasbourg International Consensus Study: Strasbourg International Consensus Study

Author

Giménez, M. (Mariano) E. (Eduardo), Gallix, B. (Benoit), Costamagna, G. (G), Vauthey, J. (J) N. (N), Moche, M. (M), Wakabayashi, G. (G), Bale, R. (R), Swanström, L. (Lee), Futterer, J. (J), Geller, D. (D), Verde, J. (Juan) M. (M), García Vazquez, A. (Alain), Boškoski, I. (I), Golse, N. (N), Müller-Stich, B. (B), Dallemagne, B. (Bernard), Falkenberg, M. (M), Jonas, S. (S), Riediger, C. (C), Diana, M. (Michele), Kvarnström, N. (N), Odisio, B. (B) C. (C), Serra, E. (E), Overduin, C. (C), Palermo, M. (M), Mutter, D. (Didier), Perretta, S. (Silvana), Pessaux, P. (Patrick), Soler, L. (L), Hostettler, A. (Alexandre), Collins, T. (Toby), Cotin, S. (Stéphane), Kostrzewa, M. (Michael), Alzaga, A. (A), Smith, M. (M), and Marescaux, J. (Jacques)

Subjects
Aucun, Sciences du Vivant [q-bio]/Médecine humaine et pathologie
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop consensus definitions of image-guided surgery, computer-assisted surgery, hybrid operating room, and surgical navigation systems. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The use of minimally invasive procedures has increased tremendously over the past 2 decades, but terminology related to image-guided minimally invasive procedures has not been standardized, which is a barrier to clear communication. METHODS: Experts in image-guided techniques and specialized engineers were invited to engage in a systematic process to develop consensus definitions of the key terms listed above. The process was designed following review of common consensus-development methodologies and included participation in 4 online surveys and a post-surveys face-to-face panel meeting held in Strasbourg, France. RESULTS: The experts settled on the terms computer-assisted surgery and intervention, image-guided surgery and intervention, hybrid operating room, and guidance systems and agreed-upon definitions of these terms, with rates of consensus of more than 80% for each term. The methodology used proved to be a compelling strategy to overcome the current difficulties related to data growth rates and technological convergence in this field. CONCLUSIONS: Our multidisciplinary collaborative approach resulted in consensus definitions that may improve communication, knowledge transfer, collaboration, and research in the rapidly changing field of image-guided minimally invasive techniques. PMC7771637

Published
2020

4. Utilization of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging in clinical practice and focal therapy: report from a Delphi consensus project

Author

Scheltema, M. J., primary, Tay, K. J., additional, Postema, A. W., additional, de Bruin, D. M., additional, Feller, J., additional, Futterer, J. J., additional, George, A. K., additional, Gupta, R. T., additional, Kahmann, F., additional, Kastner, C., additional, Laguna, M. P., additional, Natarajan, S., additional, Rais-Bahrami, S., additional, Rastinehad, A. R., additional, de Reijke, T. M., additional, Salomon, G., additional, Stone, N., additional, van Velthoven, R., additional, Villani, R., additional, Villers, A., additional, Walz, J., additional, Polascik, T. J., additional, and de la Rosette, J. J. M. C. H., additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

5. Cone beam CT guidance provides superior accuracy for complex needle paths compared with CT guidance.

Author

BUSSER, W. M. H., BRAAK, S. J., FUTTERER, J. J., VAN STRIJEN, M. J. L., HOOGEVEEN, Y. L., DE LANGE, F., and SCHULTZE KOOL, L. J.

Subjects
CONE beam computed tomography, IMAGING phantoms, FLUOROSCOPY, INTERVENTIONAL radiology, ONCOLOGIC surgery
Abstract

Objective: To determine the accuracy of cone beam CT (CBCT) guidance and CT guidance in reaching small targets in relation to needle path complexity in a phantom. Methods: CBCT guidance combines three-dimensional CBCT imaging with fluoroscopy overlay and needle planning software to provide real-time needle guidance. The accuracy of needle positioning, quantified as deviation from a target, was assessed for inplane, angulated and double angulated needle paths. Four interventional radiologists reached four targets along the three paths using CBCT and CT guidance. Accuracies were compared between CBCT and CT for each needle path and between the three approaches within both modalities. The effect of user experience in CBCT guidance was also assessed. Results: Accuracies for CBCT were significantly better than CT for the double angulated needle path (2.2 vs 6.7 mm, p<.001) for all radiologists. CBCT guidance showed no significant differences between the three approaches. For CT, deviations increased with increasing needle path complexity from 3.3mm for the inplane placements to 4.4 mm (p=0.007) and 6.7 mm (p<0.001) for the angulated and double angulated CT-guided needle placements, respectively. For double angulated needle paths, experienced CBCT users showed consistently higher accuracies than trained users [1.8 mm (range 1.2-2.2) vs 3.3mm (range 2.1-7.2) deviation from target, respectively; p=0.003). Conclusion: In terms of accuracy, CBCT is the preferred modality, irrespective of the level of user experience, for more difficult guidance procedures requiring double angulated needle paths as in oncological interventions. Advances in knowledge: Accuracy of CBCT guidance has not been discussed before. CBCT guidance allows accurate needle placement irrespective of needle path complexity. For angulated and double-angulated needle paths, CBCT is more accurate than CT guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2013
Full Text
View/download PDF

6. Resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of liver only colorectal metastases:Multidisciplinary consensus document from the COLLISION trial group

Author

Simeon J. S. Ruiter, Alette H. Ruarus, Warner Prevoo, Hester J. Scheffer, Ted Vink, Floris J. Rietema, Jan Jaap Janssen, Bart Geboers, Evelien A. C. Schouten, Bente van den Bemd, Robbert S. Puijk, Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg, Arjen Diederik, Francesco De Cobelli, G. Matthijs Kater, Gerie Groot, B.M. Zonderhuis, Fons H. Potters, C.J.A. Haasbeek, Gian Piero Serafino, Sanne Nieuwenhuizen, Mark J. Arntz, Florentine E. F. Timmer, Marleen C. A. M. Melenhorst, Maarten W Nijkamp, Anton F. Engelsman, Karin Nielsen, Kathelijn S. Versteeg, Colin Sietses, Hasan H. Eker, Marielle M.E. Coolsen, Koert P. de Jong, Petrousjka van den Tol, Mark C. Burgmans, Joris I. Erdmann, Wouter K. G. Leclercq, Cornelis H. C. Dejong, Christiaan van der Leij, A. Bruynzeel, Peter B. van den Boezem, Eric R. Manusama, Jurgen J. Fütterer, Jan J. J. de Vries, Luca Aldrighetti, Mark A.J. Meier, Johan W.H. Kruimer, Peter van Duijvendijk, Johannes H. W. de Wilt, Sarah Derks, Geert Kazemier, Bram B. van der Meijs, Martijn R. Meijerink, Surgery, AGEM - Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, CCA - Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Radiology and nuclear medicine, Radiation Oncology, Medical oncology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, CCA - Cancer Treatment and quality of life, AGEM - Re-generation and cancer of the digestive system, Nieuwenhuizen, S., Puijk, R. S., van den Bemd, B., Aldrighetti, L., Arntz, M., van den Boezem, P. B., Bruynzeel, A. M. E., Burgmans, M. C., de Cobelli, F., Coolsen, M. M. E., Dejong, C. H. C., Derks, S., Diederik, A., van Duijvendijk, P., Eker, H. H., Engelsman, A. F., Erdmann, J. I., Futterer, J. J., Geboers, B., Groot, G., Haasbeek, C. J. A., Janssen, J. -J., de Jong, K. P., Matthijs Kater, G., Kazemier, G., Kruimer, J. W. H., Leclercq, W. K. G., van der Leij, C., Manusama, E. R., Meier, M. A. J., van der Meijs, B. B., Melenhorst, M. C. A. M., Nielsen, K., Nijkamp, M. W., Potters, F. H., Prevoo, W., Rietema, F. J., Ruarus, A. H., Ruiter, S. J. S., Schouten, E. A. C., Serafino, G. P., Sietses, C., Swijnenburg, R. -J., Timmer, F. E. F., Versteeg, K. S., Vink, T., de Vries, J. J. J., de Wilt, J. H. W., Zonderhuis, B. M., Scheffer, H. J., van den Tol, P. M. P., Meijerink, M. R., Guided Treatment in Optimal Selected Cancer Patients (GUTS), Groningen Institute for Organ Transplantation (GIOT), MUMC+: MA Heelkunde (9), RS: NUTRIM - R2 - Liver and digestive health, and MUMC+: DA BV Medisch Specialisten Radiologie (9)

Subjects
0301 basic medicine, Cancer Research, Partial hepatectomy, Stereotactic body radiotherapy, Radiofrequency ablation, Colorectal cancer, Ablatability criteria, Resectability criteria, ablatability criteria, Systemic therapy, law.invention, Microwave ablation, Tumours of the digestive tract Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 14], NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY, 0302 clinical medicine, law, Irreversible electroporation, Medicine, Stage (cooking), ELDERLY-PATIENTS, Consensus guideline, SURGICAL RESECTION, lcsh:Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens, CANCER, colorectal liver metastases, Oncology, stereotactic body radiotherapy, Urological cancers Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 15], 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, PHASE-II, radiofrequency ablation, consensus guideline, resectability criteria, medicine.medical_specialty, HEPATIC RESECTION, lcsh:RC254-282, Article, 03 medical and health sciences, thermal ablation, All institutes and research themes of the Radboud University Medical Center, irreversible electroporation, business.industry, General surgery, Other Research Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 0], Gold standard, Cancer, medicine.disease, Thermal ablation, partial hepatectomy, Colorectal liver metastases, Reconstructive and regenerative medicine Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 10], 030104 developmental biology, microwave ablation, business
Abstract

The guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer crudely state that the best local treatment should be selected from a &lsquo, toolbox&rsquo, of techniques according to patient- and treatment-related factors. We created an interdisciplinary, consensus-based algorithm with specific resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). To pursue consensus, members of the multidisciplinary COLLISION and COLDFIRE trial expert panel employed the RAND appropriateness method (RAM). Statements regarding patient, disease, tumor and treatment characteristics were categorized as appropriate, equipoise or inappropriate. Patients with ECOG&le, 2, ASA&le, 3 and Charlson comorbidity index &le, 8 should be considered fit for curative-intent local therapy. When easily resectable and/or ablatable (stage IVa), (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy is not indicated. When requiring major hepatectomy (stage IVb), neo-adjuvant systemic therapy is appropriate for early metachronous disease and to reduce procedural risk. To downstage patients (stage IVc), downsizing induction systemic therapy and/or future remnant augmentation is advised. Disease can only be deemed permanently unsuitable for local therapy if downstaging failed (stage IVd). Liver resection remains the gold standard. Thermal ablation is reserved for unresectable CRLM, deep-seated resectable CRLM and can be considered when patients are in poor health. Irreversible electroporation and stereotactic body radiotherapy can be considered for unresectable perihilar and perivascular CRLM 0-5cm. This consensus document provides per-patient and per-tumor resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of CRLM. These criteria are intended to aid tumor board discussions, improve consistency when designing prospective trials and advance intersociety communications. Areas where consensus is lacking warrant future comparative studies.

Published
2020

7. Corrigendum to ‘EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer—An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees’ [European Urology 77 (2020) 223–250](S0302283819307638)(10.1016/j.eururo.2019.09.035)

Author

Bogdan Geavlete, Stefano Fanti, Susanne Krege, Alberto Briganti, Harry W. Herr, Shaista Hafeez, Mark Frydenberg, Marek Babjuk, Willem de Blok, Antti Salminen, Maria De Santis, Yann Neuzillet, Arnulf Stenzl, Joost L. Boormans, Hein Van Poppel, Karel Decaestecker, Vibeke Løgager, Jorg R. Oddens, Silke Gillessen, Pedro C. Lara, Berardino De Bari, Baris Turkbey, Andrew K. Williams, Thomas Wiegel, Mihai Dorin Vartolomei, Robert Jones, Riccardo Valdagni, Vincent Khoo, Ashish M. Kamat, Christoph R. Müller, Georgios Gakis, Neeraj Agarwal, Annemarie Leliveld, Franklin A. Vives Rivera, Robert Jan Smeenk, Luís Pacheco-Figueiredo, H. Maxim Bruins, Juan Palou, Jorge Huguet, Konstantinos Dimitropoulos, Jonathan E. Rosenberg, Carl Salembier, Ken Herrmann, Iris Brummelhuis, Morgan Rouprêt, Helle Pappot, Susanne Osanto, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Anita Smits, Susanne Vahr Lauridsen, Manish I. Patel, Theo H. van der Kwast, Paul Sargos, Michel Bolla, Karin Plass, Jurgen J. Fütterer, Hugh Mostafid, Olivier Rouvière, Valérie Fonteyne, Erik Veskimäe, Bradley R. Pieters, Richard P. Meijer, Anne E. Kiltie, Tom J.H. Arends, Arndt Hartmann, Amir Sherif, Antoni Vilaseca, Stéphane Culine, Wim J.G. Oyen, Evanguelos Xylinas, Daniel Castellano, Shomik Sengupta, James N'Dow, Maria J. Ribal, Mesut Remzi, Richard Zigeuner, A. Müller, Richard Cathomas, Joaquim Bellmunt, Nicholas D. James, Paolo Gontero, Pieter De Visschere, Eva Compérat, Alison Birtle, Margitta Retz, Dickon Hayne, Michael Rink, Virginia Hernández, J. Alfred Witjes, Marco Moschini, J. Domínguez-Escrig, Yohann Loriot, Estefania Linares-Espinós, Peter C. Black, Alberto Bossi, Bertrand Tombal, Sylvain Ladoire, Aristotle Bamias, Ananya Choudhury, Simon J. Crabb, Steven MacLennan, Peter Wiklund, Antoine G. van der Heijden, Arturo Chiti, Bernhard Grubmüller, Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa, Alan Horwich, George N. Thalmann, Bernard H. Bochner, Florian Roghmann, Max Bürger, Jan Oldenburg, Peter Hoskin, Andrea Necchi, Jonathan Richenberg, Anja Lorch, Peter Paul M. Willemse, Donna E. Hansel, M. Carmen Mir, Thomas Powles, Theo M. de Reijke, Ann Henry, Witjes, J. A., Babjuk, M., Bellmunt, J., Bruins, H. M., De Reijke, T. M., De Santis, M., Gillessen, S., James, N., Maclennan, S., Palou, J., Powles, T., Ribal, M. J., Shariat, S. F., Van Der Kwast, T., Xylinas, E., Agarwal, N., Arends, T., Bamias, A., Birtle, A., Black, P. C., Bochner, B. H., Bolla, M., Boormans, J. L., Bossi, A., Briganti, A., Brummelhuis, I., Burger, M., Castellano, D., Cathomas, R., Chiti, A., Choudhury, A., Comperat, E., Crabb, S., Culine, S., De Bari, B., De Blok, W., De Visschere, P. J. L., Decaestecker, K., Dimitropoulos, K., Dominguez-Escrig, J. L., Fanti, S., Fonteyne, V., Frydenberg, M., Futterer, J. J., Gakis, G., Geavlete, B., Gontero, P., Grubmuller, B., Hafeez, S., Hansel, D. E., Hartmann, A., Hayne, D., Henry, A. M., Hernandez, V., Herr, H., Herrmann, K., Hoskin, P., Huguet, J., Jereczek-Fossa, B. A., Jones, R., Kamat, A. M., Khoo, V., Kiltie, A. E., Krege, S., Ladoire, S., Lara, P. C., Leliveld, A., Linares-Espinos, E., Logager, V., Lorch, A., Loriot, Y., Meijer, R., Mir, M. C., Moschini, M., Mostafid, H., Muller, A. -C., Muller, C. R., N'Dow, J., Necchi, A., Neuzillet, Y., Oddens, J. R., Oldenburg, J., Osanto, S., Oyen, W. J. G., Pacheco-Figueiredo, L., Pappot, H., Patel, M. I., Pieters, B. R., Plass, K., Remzi, M., Retz, M., Richenberg, J., Rink, M., Roghmann, F., Rosenberg, J. E., Roupret, M., Rouviere, O., Salembier, C., Salminen, A., Sargos, P., Sengupta, S., Sherif, A., Smeenk, R. J., Smits, A., Stenzl, A., Thalmann, G. N., Tombal, B., Turkbey, B., Lauridsen, S. V., Valdagni, R., Van Der Heijden, A. G., Van Poppel, H., Vartolomei, M. D., Veskimae, E., Vilaseca, A., Rivera, F. A. V., Wiegel, T., Wiklund, P., Willemse, P. -P. M., Williams, A., Zigeuner, R., Horwich, A., Urology, APH - Personalized Medicine, APH - Quality of Care, CCA - Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Radiotherapy, UCL - SSS/IREC/CHEX - Pôle de chirgurgie expérimentale et transplantation, and UCL - (SLuc) Service d'urologie

Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty, Bladder cancer, business.industry, Urology, 030232 urology & nephrology, MEDLINE, Cancer, Regret, medicine.disease, 3. Good health, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Medicine, Urologia, University medical, Bufeta -- Càncer, Protocols clínics, business
Abstract

The authors regret that a co-author was mistakenly missed from the authorship. The following co-author should have been included in the authorship: Peter-Paul M. Willemse Department of Oncological Urology, University Medical Center, Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Published
2020

8. EAU-ESMO consensus statements on the management of advanced and variant bladder cancer-an international collaborative multi-stakeholder effort: under the auspices of the EAU and ESMO Guidelines Committees†.

Author

Horwich A, Babjuk M, Bellmunt J, Bruins HM, De Reijke TM, De Santis M, Gillessen S, James N, Maclennan S, Palou J, Powles T, Ribal MJ, Shariat SF, Van Der Kwast T, Xylinas E, Agarwal N, Arends T, Bamias A, Birtle A, Black PC, Bochner BH, Bolla M, Boormans JL, Bossi A, Briganti A, Brummelhuis I, Burger M, Castellano D, Cathomas R, Chiti A, Choudhury A, Compérat E, Crabb S, Culine S, De Bari B, DeBlok W, De Visschere PJL, Decaestecker K, Dimitropoulos K, Dominguez-Escrig JL, Fanti S, Fonteyne V, Frydenberg M, Futterer JJ, Gakis G, Geavlete B, Gontero P, Grubmüller B, Hafeez S, Hansel DE, Hartmann A, Hayne D, Henry AM, Hernandez V, Herr H, Herrmann K, Hoskin P, Huguet J, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Jones R, Kamat AM, Khoo V, Kiltie AE, Krege S, Ladoire S, Lara PC, Leliveld A, Linares-Espinós E, Løgager V, Lorch A, Loriot Y, Meijer R, Carmen Mir M, Moschini M, Mostafid H, Müller AC, Müller CR, N'Dow J, Necchi A, Neuzillet Y, Oddens JR, Oldenburg J, Osanto S, Oyen WJG, Pacheco-Figueiredo L, Pappot H, Patel MI, Pieters BR, Plass K, Remzi M, Retz M, Richenberg J, Rink M, Roghmann F, Rosenberg JE, Rouprêt M, Rouvière O, Salembier C, Salminen A, Sargos P, Sengupta S, Sherif A, Smeenk RJ, Smits A, Stenzl A, Thalmann GN, Tombal B, Turkbey B, Vahr Lauridsen S, Valdagni R, Van Der Heijden AG, Van Poppel H, Vartolomei MD, Veskimäe E, Vilaseca A, Vives Rivera FA, Wiegel T, Wiklund P, Williams A, Zigeuner R, and Witjes JA

Subjects
Delphi Technique, Europe, Humans, International Cooperation, Medical Oncology methods, Neoplasm Staging, Societies, Medical standards, Stakeholder Participation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Urinary Bladder pathology, Urinary Bladder Neoplasms pathology, Urology methods, Consensus, Medical Oncology standards, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Urinary Bladder Neoplasms therapy, Urology standards
Abstract

Background: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial., Objective: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management., Design: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference., Setting: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference., Participants: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus)., Results and Limitations: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease., Conclusions: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

9. MR imaging-guided prostate interventional imaging: Ready for a clinical use?

Author

Cornud F, Bomers J, Futterer JJ, Ghai S, Reijnen JS, and Tempany C

Subjects
Equipment Design, Humans, Image-Guided Biopsy instrumentation, Image-Guided Biopsy methods, Male, Prostatic Neoplasms surgery, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional instrumentation, Prostatic Neoplasms diagnostic imaging, Prostatic Neoplasms pathology
Abstract

Prostate interventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is now routinely performed in many centers. Its more widespread acceptance is limited by the cost of the use of MRI largely related to the long duration time of the procedures. However, the benefit of a robotic assistance has generated a new interest, because it substantially shortens the procedure time, while improving the accuracy. MRI-guided biopsy is considered as an appealing alternative to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided fusion biopsy, given the limitations of TRUS-MRI image registration systems. MRI-guided focal treatment also benefits from robotic assistance and from the unique property of MRI, which allows the measurement of the temperature in real-time during tumor ablation. The transrectal and transperineal approaches can be used and the respective indications of each pathway will depend on several factors, including the location of the tumor and the examination time, which will condition the occupation time of the MR room, a major factor influencing the overall cost of MRI-guided procedures. This review addresses the current practice of prostate MRI-guided interventional procedures and potential future applications., (Copyright © 2018 Soci showét showé françaises de radiologie. All rights reserved.)

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

10. Medical students' perspective on training in anatomy.

Author

Triepels CPR, Koppes DM, Van Kuijk SMJ, Popeijus HE, Lamers WH, van Gorp T, Futterer JJ, Kruitwagen RFPM, and Notten KJB

Subjects
Adolescent, Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Audiovisual Aids, Cross-Sectional Studies, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Educational Measurement, Female, Focus Groups, Humans, Learning, Male, Young Adult, Anatomy education, Students, Medical
Abstract

Gaining sufficient knowledge of anatomy is an important part of medical education. Factors that influence how well students learn anatomical structures include available sources, learning time and study assistance. This study explores the attitude of medical students with regard to studying anatomy and evaluates possibilities for improvement of training in anatomy. Twenty medical students participated in a focus group meeting. Based on this focus group, an online survey consisting of 27 questions was developed and distributed amongst medical students of Maastricht University, the Netherlands. A total of 495 medical students (both Bachelor and Master level) participated in this survey. Master students found studying anatomy less attractive than Bachelor students (36.8% of the Master students vs. 47.9% of the Bachelor students (p=.024)). Although most students responded that they thought it is important to study anatomy, 48% of all students studied anatomy less than 10h per study block of 8 weeks. Only 47.9% of the students rated their knowledge of anatomy as adequate. Students suggested that three-dimensional techniques would help improve their knowledge of anatomy. Therefore investing in three-dimensional tools could prove beneficial in the future., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.)

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results