Literature DB >> 19863418

Diagnostic value of multislice computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer: a literature review.

J Hansen1, A G Jurik.   

Abstract

Testicular cancer is the most frequent malignant disorder in men aged 15-35 years. Generally, diagnosing and follow-up include computer tomography (CT) examinations to detect possible retroperitoneal spread (abdomen and pelvis), resulting in at least eight CT examinations. This patient group is thereby exposed to a non-neglectable radiation dose, increasing the risk of future radiation-induced secondary cancer. This is especially problematic in potentially surgically cured patients with stage 1 testicular cancer. Thus, it can be beneficial to substitute CT with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), provided there is valid evidence that the diagnostic value of MRI is at least comparable to current multislice CT (MSCT). The purpose of this study was to analyze whether there is evidence to recommend a substitution of MSCT with MRI in the diagnosis of retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer. A literature search on the diagnostic accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of MSCT and MRI in the diagnosis of retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer was performed in the following databases: PubMed, EmBase, and ISI Web of Science. The search was limited to include the period from 2000 to September 2008, and to human and English-language publications. Forty-four publications were obtained for formal review (27 from PubMed, 15 from EmBase, two from ISI Web of Science). None of the publications reviewed encompassed diagnostic specificity and sensitivity of MSCT, and they lacked systematic comparison of MSCT and MRI. Only one study included sensitivity and specificity of MRI compared to single-slice CT. Both methods had a sensitivity and a specificity of approximately 70%. The literature review did not reveal valid data regarding diagnostic accuracy of MRI compared with MSCT for diagnosing retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer. A prospective blinded comparative study is needed to provide valid evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19863418     DOI: 10.3109/02841850903220371

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Radiol        ISSN: 0284-1851            Impact factor:   1.990


  8 in total

1.  Automated tube potential selection for standard chest and abdominal CT in follow-up patients with testicular cancer: comparison with fixed tube potential.

Authors:  Ralph Gnannt; Anna Winklehner; Daniel Eberli; Alexander Knuth; Thomas Frauenfelder; Hatem Alkadhi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Can magnetic resonance imaging replace conventional computerized tomography for follow-up of patients with testicular cancer? A systematic review.

Authors:  Jonas Busch; Stefanie Schmidt; Peter Albers; Julia Heinzelbecker; Sabine Kliesch; Julia Lackner; David Pfister; Christian Ruf; Christian Winter; Friedemann Zengerling; Dirk Beyersdorff
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Magnetic resonance versus computed tomography for the detection of retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis due to testicular cancer: A systematic literature review.

Authors:  Andrés Felipe Herrera Ortiz; Lorena Josefina Fernández Beaujon; Sandra Yulitza García Villamizar; Freddy Fernando Fonseca López
Journal:  Eur J Radiol Open       Date:  2021-08-17

4.  Patients with testicular cancer undergoing CT surveillance demonstrate a pitfall of radiation-induced cancer risk estimates: the timing paradox.

Authors:  Pari V Pandharipande; Jonathan D Eisenberg; Richard J Lee; Michael E Gilmore; Ekin A Turan; Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Bob Liu; Chung Yin Kong; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  A unique scrotal extratesticular epidermod cyst attached to the seminal vesicles.

Authors:  Hasan Salih Sağlam; Sükrü Kumsar; Osman Köse; Oztuğ Adsan
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 6.  [Diagnostics and treatment of seminomatous germ cell tumors].

Authors:  F Zengerling; J Müller; S Krege; M Schrader
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 0.639

7.  [Diagnosis and treatment of nonseminomatous germ cell tumors].

Authors:  S Krege
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 0.639

8.  Maintaining success, reducing treatment burden, focusing on survivorship: highlights from the third European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer.

Authors:  J Beyer; P Albers; R Altena; J Aparicio; C Bokemeyer; J Busch; R Cathomas; E Cavallin-Stahl; N W Clarke; J Claßen; G Cohn-Cedermark; A A Dahl; G Daugaard; U De Giorgi; M De Santis; M De Wit; R De Wit; K P Dieckmann; M Fenner; K Fizazi; A Flechon; S D Fossa; J R Germá Lluch; J A Gietema; S Gillessen; A Giwercman; J T Hartmann; A Heidenreich; M Hentrich; F Honecker; A Horwich; R A Huddart; S Kliesch; C Kollmannsberger; S Krege; M P Laguna; L H J Looijenga; A Lorch; J P Lotz; F Mayer; A Necchi; N Nicolai; J Nuver; K Oechsle; J Oldenburg; J W Oosterhuis; T Powles; E Rajpert-De Meyts; O Rick; G Rosti; R Salvioni; M Schrader; S Schweyer; F Sedlmayer; A Sohaib; R Souchon; T Tandstad; C Winter; C Wittekind
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2012-11-14       Impact factor: 32.976

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.