Research Article
Year 2019,
, 287 - 294, 30.06.2019
Abstract
References
- 1. Ho¨ckel M, Horn LC, Einenkel J. Laterally extended endopelvic resection: surgical treatment of locally advanced and recurrent cancer of the uterine cervix and vagina based on ontogenetic anatomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127:297–302.2. Narayan K, Lin MY. Staging for cervix cancer: Role of radiology, surgery and clinical assessment.Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol.2015;29:833-844.3. Ho¨ckel M, Horn LC, Hentschel B, et al. Total mesometrial resection: high resolution nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy based on developmentally defined surgical anatomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2003;13:791–803.4. Mangler M, Zech N, Schneider A, et al. Aspects of therapy for cervical cancer in Germany 2012: Results from a survey of German gynaecological hospitals. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013;73:227–238.5. Zullo MA, Manci N, Angioli R, et al. Vesical dysfunctions after radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a critical review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003;48:287–293.6. Raspagliesi F, Ditto A, Fontanelli R, et al. Type II versus Type III nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: comparison of lower urinary tract dysfunctions. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;102:256–262.7. Delgado G, Bundy BN, Fowler WC Jr, et al. A prospective surgical pathological study of stage I squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;35: 314–320.8. Landoni F, Bocciolone L, Perego P, et al. Cancer of the cervix, FIGO stages IB and IIA: patterns of local growth and paracervical extension. Int J Gynecol Cancer.1995;5:329–334.9. Balleyguier C, Sala E, Da Cunha T, et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:1102–1110.10. Bhosale P, Peungjesada S, Devine C, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging as an adjunct to clinical staging in cervical carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:855–864.11. Janus CL, Mendelson DS, Moore S, et al. Staging of cervical carcinoma; accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Clin Imaging. 1989;13:114-116.12. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB et al. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for peroperative staging. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86:43-50.13. Sheu MH, Chang CY, Wang JH, Yen MS. Preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma with MR imaging: a reappraisal of diagnostic accuracy and pitfalls. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:1828–1833.14. Hori M, Kim T, Murakami T, et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: preoperative staging with 3.0-T MR imaging—comparison with 1.5-T MR imaging. Radiology.2009; 251:96–104.15. Thomeer MG, Gerestein C, Spronk S, et al. Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol.2013; 23:2005–2201.16. Qu JR, Qin L, Li X,et al. Predicting Parametrial Invasion in Cervical Carcinoma (Stages IB1, IB2, and IIA): Diagnostic Accuracy of T2-Weighted Imaging Combined With DWI at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol.2018;210:677-684. 17. Park JJ, Kim CK, Park SY, Park BK. Parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: fused T2-weighted imaging and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression at 3 T. Radiology 2015;274:734–741.18. Lakhman Y, Akin O, Park KJ, et al. Stage IB1 cervical cancer: role of preoperative MR imaging in selection of patients for fertility-sparing radical trachelectomy. Radiology. 2013;269:149-158.19. Rob L, Skapa P, Robova H. Fertility-sparing surgery in patients with cervical cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:192–200.20. Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y. Fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: indications and applications. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010;8:1435–1438.21. Dursun P, LeBlanc E, Nogueira MC. Radical vaginal trachelectomy (Dargent’s operation): a critical review of the literature. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:933–941.22. Covens A. Preserving fertility in early cervical cancer with radical trachelectomy. Contemp Obstet Gynecol. 2003;2:46–66.23. Boss EA, Barentsz JO, Massuger LF, et al. The role of MR imaging in invasive cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2000;10:256–270.24. Bourgioti C, Chatoupis K, Moulopoulos LA. Current imaging strategies for the evaluation of uterine cervical cancer. World J Radiol. 2016;28:342-354.
Additional diagnostic value of diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging to conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in local staging of primary uterine cervical cancer
Abstract
Objective: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is a helpful modality for detecting and
staging gynecological cancers. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) could improve
the accuracy rates of MR imaging. The aim of this study was to assess the
additional diagnostic value of DWI over conventional MR imaging in assessing
the local extent of primary cervical cancer.
Method: Forty
patients with primary uterine cervical cancer were enrolled in the study,
prospectively.
All MR examinations were performed using a 1.5 Tesla
Unit MR with a body coil. Sagittal and axial T2-weighted MR images, sagittal
and axial DWI (at b values of 0, 500,1000 s/mm2) with ADC maps were
obtained. The images were evaluated by two different readers independently. The
degree of the interobserver agreement between the radiologists was assessed
with kappa statistics.
Results: Mean age of
the study population was 50.7±11.1 years. Kappa values ranged from 0.76 to 1
for both readers indicating excellent agreement. Accuracy rates were as follows
for reader 1 respectively with conventional and conventional plus DWI; stromal
invasion 0.92/0.95; parametrial invasion 0.87/0.92; vaginal invasion 0.87/0.92;
pelvic sidewall invasion 0.90/0.97. Accuracy rates were as follows for reader 2
respectively with conventional and conventional plus DWI images; stromal
invasion 0.90/0.95; parametrial invasion 0.87/0.92; vaginal invasion 0.87/0.97;
pelvic sidewall invasion 0.90/0.95.
Conclusions: MR provides satisfactory accuracy rates in the
evaluation of the local extent of uterine cervical carcinoma, and adding DWI
improves the diagnostic performance of conventional MR.
References
- 1. Ho¨ckel M, Horn LC, Einenkel J. Laterally extended endopelvic resection: surgical treatment of locally advanced and recurrent cancer of the uterine cervix and vagina based on ontogenetic anatomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127:297–302.2. Narayan K, Lin MY. Staging for cervix cancer: Role of radiology, surgery and clinical assessment.Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol.2015;29:833-844.3. Ho¨ckel M, Horn LC, Hentschel B, et al. Total mesometrial resection: high resolution nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy based on developmentally defined surgical anatomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2003;13:791–803.4. Mangler M, Zech N, Schneider A, et al. Aspects of therapy for cervical cancer in Germany 2012: Results from a survey of German gynaecological hospitals. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013;73:227–238.5. Zullo MA, Manci N, Angioli R, et al. Vesical dysfunctions after radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a critical review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003;48:287–293.6. Raspagliesi F, Ditto A, Fontanelli R, et al. Type II versus Type III nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy: comparison of lower urinary tract dysfunctions. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;102:256–262.7. Delgado G, Bundy BN, Fowler WC Jr, et al. A prospective surgical pathological study of stage I squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;35: 314–320.8. Landoni F, Bocciolone L, Perego P, et al. Cancer of the cervix, FIGO stages IB and IIA: patterns of local growth and paracervical extension. Int J Gynecol Cancer.1995;5:329–334.9. Balleyguier C, Sala E, Da Cunha T, et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:1102–1110.10. Bhosale P, Peungjesada S, Devine C, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging as an adjunct to clinical staging in cervical carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:855–864.11. Janus CL, Mendelson DS, Moore S, et al. Staging of cervical carcinoma; accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Clin Imaging. 1989;13:114-116.12. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB et al. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for peroperative staging. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86:43-50.13. Sheu MH, Chang CY, Wang JH, Yen MS. Preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma with MR imaging: a reappraisal of diagnostic accuracy and pitfalls. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:1828–1833.14. Hori M, Kim T, Murakami T, et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: preoperative staging with 3.0-T MR imaging—comparison with 1.5-T MR imaging. Radiology.2009; 251:96–104.15. Thomeer MG, Gerestein C, Spronk S, et al. Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol.2013; 23:2005–2201.16. Qu JR, Qin L, Li X,et al. Predicting Parametrial Invasion in Cervical Carcinoma (Stages IB1, IB2, and IIA): Diagnostic Accuracy of T2-Weighted Imaging Combined With DWI at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol.2018;210:677-684. 17. Park JJ, Kim CK, Park SY, Park BK. Parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: fused T2-weighted imaging and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression at 3 T. Radiology 2015;274:734–741.18. Lakhman Y, Akin O, Park KJ, et al. Stage IB1 cervical cancer: role of preoperative MR imaging in selection of patients for fertility-sparing radical trachelectomy. Radiology. 2013;269:149-158.19. Rob L, Skapa P, Robova H. Fertility-sparing surgery in patients with cervical cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:192–200.20. Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y. Fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: indications and applications. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010;8:1435–1438.21. Dursun P, LeBlanc E, Nogueira MC. Radical vaginal trachelectomy (Dargent’s operation): a critical review of the literature. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:933–941.22. Covens A. Preserving fertility in early cervical cancer with radical trachelectomy. Contemp Obstet Gynecol. 2003;2:46–66.23. Boss EA, Barentsz JO, Massuger LF, et al. The role of MR imaging in invasive cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2000;10:256–270.24. Bourgioti C, Chatoupis K, Moulopoulos LA. Current imaging strategies for the evaluation of uterine cervical cancer. World J Radiol. 2016;28:342-354.
There are 1 citations in total.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Health Care Administration |
| Journal Section | Medical Science Research Articles |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | June 30, 2019 |
| Acceptance Date | May 15, 2019 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2019 |