7 results on '"Verma, Sadhna"'
Search Results
2. ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® Post-treatment Follow-up Prostate Cancer
- Author
-
Froemming, Adam T., primary, Verma, Sadhna, additional, Eberhardt, Steven C., additional, Oto, Aytekin, additional, Alexander, Lauren F., additional, Allen, Brian C., additional, Coakley, Fergus V., additional, Davis, Brian J., additional, Fulgham, Pat F., additional, Hosseinzadeh, Keyanoosh, additional, Porter, Christopher, additional, Sahni, V. Anik, additional, Schuster, David M., additional, Showalter, Timothy N., additional, Venkatesan, Aradhana M., additional, Wang, Carolyn L., additional, and Remer, Erick M., additional
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® Prostate Cancer—Pretreatment Detection, Surveillance, and Staging
- Author
-
Coakley, Fergus V., primary, Oto, Aytekin, additional, Alexander, Lauren F., additional, Allen, Brian C., additional, Davis, Brian J., additional, Froemming, Adam T., additional, Fulgham, Pat F., additional, Hosseinzadeh, Keyanoosh, additional, Porter, Christopher, additional, Sahni, V. Anik, additional, Schuster, David M., additional, Showalter, Timothy N., additional, Venkatesan, Aradhana M., additional, Verma, Sadhna, additional, Wang, Carolyn L., additional, Remer, Erick M., additional, and Eberhardt, Steven C., additional
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® Hematospermia
- Author
-
Hosseinzadeh, Keyanoosh, primary, Oto, Aytekin, additional, Allen, Brian C., additional, Coakley, Fergus V., additional, Friedman, Barak, additional, Fulgham, Pat F., additional, Hartman, Matthew S., additional, Heller, Matthew T., additional, Porter, Christopher, additional, Sahni, V. Anik, additional, Sudakoff, Gary S., additional, Verma, Sadhna, additional, Wang, Carolyn L., additional, Yoo, Don C., additional, Remer, Erick M., additional, and Eberhardt, Steven C., additional
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Post-treatment Follow-up Prostate Cancer.
- Author
-
Froemming, Adam T., Verma, Sadhna, Eberhardt, Steven C., Oto, Aytekin, Alexander, Lauren F., Allen, Brian C., Coakley, Fergus V., Davis, Brian J., Fulgham, Pat F., Hosseinzadeh, Keyanoosh, Porter, Christopher, Sahni, V. Anik, Schuster, David M., Showalter, Timothy N., Venkatesan, Aradhana M., Wang, Carolyn L., Remer, Erick M., and Expert Panel on Urologic Imaging:
- Abstract
Diagnosis and management of prostate cancer post treatment is a large and complex problem, and care of these patients requires multidisciplinary involvement of imaging, medical, and surgical specialties. Imaging capabilities for evaluation of men with recurrent prostate cancer are rapidly evolving, particularly with PET and MRI. At the same time, treatment options and capabilities are expanding and improving. These recommendations separate patients into three broad categories: (1) patients status post-radical prostatectomy, (2) clinical concern for residual or recurrent disease after nonsurgical local and pelvic treatments, and (3) metastatic prostate. This article is a review of the current literature regarding imaging in these settings and the resulting recommendations for imaging. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Prostate Cancer-Pretreatment Detection, Surveillance, and Staging.
- Author
-
Coakley, Fergus V., Oto, Aytekin, Alexander, Lauren F., Allen, Brian C., Davis, Brian J., Froemming, Adam T., Fulgham, Pat F., Hosseinzadeh, Keyanoosh, Porter, Christopher, Sahni, V. Anik, Schuster, David M., Showalter, Timothy N., Venkatesan, Aradhana M., Verma, Sadhna, Wang, Carolyn L., Remer, Erick M., Eberhardt, Steven C., and Expert Panel on Urologic Imaging:
- Abstract
Despite the frequent statement that "most men die with prostate cancer, not of it," the reality is that prostate cancer is second only to lung cancer as a cause of death from malignancy in American men. The primary goal during baseline evaluation of prostate cancer is disease characterization, that is, establishing disease presence, extent (local and distant), and aggressiveness. Prostate cancer is usually diagnosed after the finding of a suspicious serum prostate-specific antigen level or digital rectal examination. Tissue diagnosis may be obtained by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy or MRI-targeted biopsy. The latter requires a preliminary multiparametric MRI, which has emerged as a powerful and relatively accurate tool for the local evaluation of prostate cancer over the last few decades. Bone scintigraphy and CT are primarily used to detect bone and nodal metastases in patients found to have intermediate- or high-risk disease at biopsy. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Hematospermia.
- Author
-
Hosseinzadeh, Keyanoosh, Oto, Aytekin, Allen, Brian C., Coakley, Fergus V., Friedman, Barak, Fulgham, Pat F., Hartman, Matthew S., Heller, Matthew T., Porter, Christopher, Sahni, V. Anik, Sudakoff, Gary S., Verma, Sadhna, Wang, Carolyn L., Yoo, Don C., Remer, Erick M., Eberhardt, Steven C., and Expert Panel on Urologic Imaging:
- Abstract
Most men with hematospermia or hemospermia (HS) are young (<40 years of age), presenting with transient or episodic HS without other signs or symptoms of disease. The condition is self-limiting in most cases and idiopathic in nature. When a cause can be identified, infections of the urogenital tract are the most common. Imaging does not play a role in this patient population. In older men (>40 years of age), clinical screening for prostate cancer is advised. Furthermore, when HS is persistent or has symptoms, causes include obstruction or stricture at the level of the verumontanum, calcifications or calculi in the prostate, ejaculatory ducts or seminal vesicles, and cysts arising within these structures. Noninvasive imaging, predominantly transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and MRI, can be used in men of any age with persistent or refractory HS, or other associated symptoms or signs. TRUS is considered as the first-line imaging with MRI used when TRUS is inconclusive or negative. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.