Literature DB >> 10831697

Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities--report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group.

C M Tempany1, K H Zou, S G Silverman, D L Brown, A B Kurtz, B J McNeil.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare ultrasonography (US), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and computed tomography (CT) for diagnosing and staging advanced ovarian cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: US, CT, and MR imaging were performed in 280 patients. Images were read by three radiologists from each of the five hospitals. Image analysis included determination of malignancy within the peritoneum (11 sites), lymph nodes (10 sites), and hepatic parenchyma. The standard of reference was based on surgical and histopathologic findings. Statistical methods used were receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, pairwise comparison of areas under the ROC curves (A(z)), analysis of sensitivity and specificity pairs, and assessment of agreement between the degree of suspicion and standard of reference.
RESULTS: There were 118 patients with malignant tumors; 73 (62%) had stage III or IV disease. Metastases were found in the peritoneum in 70 (59%), nodes in 20 (17%), and liver in seven (6%) cases. In the peritoneum, MR imaging and CT (A(z) = 0.96 for both) were more accurate than US (A(z) = 0.86), especially in the subdiaphragmatic spaces and hepatic surfaces. MR imaging and CT were more sensitive than US (95%, 92%, and 69%, respectively) for peritoneal metastases. MR imaging was more accurate than CT for detection of lymph node metastases (A(z) = 0.76 vs 0.57, P =.04). In the liver, the A(z) values for the three modalities were 0.77-0.94.
CONCLUSION: CT and MR imaging are equally accurate, and either modality can be used to stage advanced ovarian cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10831697     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.215.3.r00jn25761

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  55 in total

Review 1.  ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up.

Authors:  Rosemarie Forstner; Evis Sala; Karen Kinkel; John A Spencer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-09-14       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Integrated PET/CT as a first-line re-staging modality in patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer.

Authors:  G Mangili; M Picchio; S Sironi; R Viganò; E Rabaiotti; D Bornaghi; V Bettinardi; C Crivellaro; C Messa; F Fazio
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-12-20       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Diagnostic Performance of Computed Tomography for Preoperative Staging of Patients with Non-endometrioid Carcinomas of the Uterine Corpus.

Authors:  Yulia Lakhman; Seth S Katz; Debra A Goldman; Derya Yakar; Hebert A Vargas; Ramon E Sosa; Maura Miccò; Robert A Soslow; Hedvig Hricak; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Evis Sala
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Comparative evaluation of multidetector CT and MR imaging in the differentiation of adnexal masses.

Authors:  A C Tsili; C Tsampoulas; M Argyropoulou; I Navrozoglou; Y Alamanos; E Paraskevaidis; S C Efremidis
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography using Sonazoid(®) is useful for diagnosis of malignant ovarian tumors: comparison with Doppler ultrasound.

Authors:  Shoko Kumazawa; Tomokazu Umezu; Yuko Kanayama; Naohisa Kamiyama; Shiro Suzuki; Mika Mizuno; Hiroaki Kajiyama; Kiyosumi Shibata; Fumitaka Kikkawa
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2012-07-04       Impact factor: 1.314

Review 6.  Intraoperative imaging in ovarian cancer: fact or fiction?

Authors:  Lucia M A Crane; Marleen van Oosten; Rick G Pleijhuis; Arash Motekallemi; Sean C Dowdy; William A Cliby; Ate G J van der Zee; Gooitzen M van Dam
Journal:  Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 4.488

7.  Advanced Primary Epithelial Ovarian and Peritoneal Carcinoma-Does Diagnostic Accuracy of Preoperative CT Scan for Detection of Peritoneal Metastatic Sites Reflect into Prediction of Suboptimal Debulking? A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Kiran Bagul; D K Vijaykumar; Anupama Rajanbabu; Mitchelle Aline Antony; Venkatesan Ranganathan
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-02-18

8.  Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted sequence for staging of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a clinical feasibility study in comparison to CT and FDG-PET/CT.

Authors:  Katrijn Michielsen; Ignace Vergote; Katya Op de Beeck; Frederic Amant; Karin Leunen; Philippe Moerman; Christophe Deroose; Geert Souverijns; Steven Dymarkowski; Frederik De Keyzer; Vincent Vandecaveye
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Image-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of ovarian tumors: An assessment of diagnostic efficacy.

Authors:  Ghazala Mehdi; Veena Maheshwari; Sheerin Afzal; Hena A Ansari; Maryem Ansari
Journal:  J Cytol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 10.  Low-grade epithelial ovarian cancer: what a radiologist should know.

Authors:  Sherif Elsherif; Sanaz Javadi; Chitra Viswanathan; Silvana Faria; Priya Bhosale
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 3.039

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.