Literature DB >> 1362678

Staging of cervical cancer: comparison between magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and pelvic examination under anesthesia.

C M Ho1, T Y Chien, C M Jeng, Y M Tsang, B Y Shih, S C Chang.   

Abstract

A prospective study was undertaken to compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with computed tomography (CT) and examination under anesthesia (EUA) in staging cervical carcinoma, with special emphasis on parametrial status. Twenty patients with carcinoma of the cervix, in whom the extent of the disease was surgically confirmed, were analyzed by MRI, CT and EUA. The tumor size estimated by MRI correlated well (r = 0.79, p < 0.001) with those obtained by histopathologic measurement of the surgical specimen. Neither clinical examination nor CT could precisely estimate tumor size. The overall accuracy rate of MRI in staging carcinoma of the cervix was 75%, compared with 32% for CT staging and 55% for clinical staging. The accuracy rate of these modalities for parametrial status was 90% for MRI, 55% for CT and 82.5% for EUA. MRI accurately excluded all 20 patients with pelvic side wall, bladder and rectal involvement. In conclusion, MRI is superior to CT and EUA in assessment of the parametrium (90% vs 55% vs 82.5%, p < 0.005). From MRI, tumor size can be estimated precisely. Although a larger scale study comparing MRI and CT is needed to determine their roles, both should help in the diagnosis and selection of proper treatment for cervical carcinoma. Our preliminary report agrees with previous reports that MRI is promising and indispensable. MRI should be routinely used in conjunction with clinical staging to determine appropriate therapy in patients with cervical carcinoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1362678

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Formos Med Assoc        ISSN: 0929-6646            Impact factor:   3.282


  4 in total

1.  Is MRI helpful in assessing the distance of the tumour from the internal os in patients with cervical cancer below FIGO Stage IB2?

Authors:  P R Bhosale; R B Iyer; P Ramalingam; K M Schmeler; W Wei; R L Bassett; P T Ramirez; M Frumovitz
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 2.350

Review 2.  Current imaging strategies for the evaluation of uterine cervical cancer.

Authors:  Charis Bourgioti; Konstantinos Chatoupis; Lia Angela Moulopoulos
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2016-04-28

3.  Comparison of initial computed tomography-based target delineation and subsequent magnetic resonance imaging-based target delineation for cervical cancer brachytherapy.

Authors:  Taylor J Corriher; Sunil W Dutta; Clayton E Alonso; Bruce Libby; Kara D Romano; Timothy N Showalter
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2020-06-30

4.  Cervical Cancer Staging in Saudi Arabia Clinicoradiological Correlation.

Authors:  Nisreen Anfinan
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2019-06-23       Impact factor: 3.411

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.