BACKGROUND: Cervical carcinoma is the only gynecological tumor still being staged mainly by clinical examination and only a limited use of diagnostic radiology. Cross sectional imaging is increasingly used as an aid in the staging procedure. We wanted to assess the impact of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in addition to the clinical staging of patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective single-centre analysis of 183 women referred to a tertiary referral centre for gynecological tumors (≤ 65 years old) with cervical cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2006 who have undergone an MRI investigation before start of treatment. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed and any change of the planned treatment after the MRI examination was noted. RESULTS: In patients with cervical carcinoma FIGO stage Ia2-IIa treated surgically, the treatment plan was altered due to MRI results in 10/125 patients. In the smaller group of patients with clinically more advanced disease receiving radio-chemotherapy, the treatment plan was altered in 12/58 patients. Reasons for changing the treatment plan after MRI were findings indicating a higher (n = 8) or lower (n = 5) local tumor stage, findings of para aortic nodal disease (n = 4) or difficulty to clinically examine the patient due to obesity (n = 2). MRI was also an aid in deciding whether or not to offer fertility preserving treatment in three cases. CONCLUSION: The use of MRI affects treatment planning in patients with cancer of the uterine cervix. The impact is more obvious in more advanced stages of disease and in patients who are difficult to examine clinically due to, for example body constitution. The result of MRI is also an aid in deciding whether or not a fertility preserving operation is feasible.
BACKGROUND:Cervical carcinoma is the only gynecological tumor still being staged mainly by clinical examination and only a limited use of diagnostic radiology. Cross sectional imaging is increasingly used as an aid in the staging procedure. We wanted to assess the impact of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in addition to the clinical staging of patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective single-centre analysis of 183 women referred to a tertiary referral centre for gynecological tumors (≤ 65 years old) with cervical cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2006 who have undergone an MRI investigation before start of treatment. Patient records were retrospectively reviewed and any change of the planned treatment after the MRI examination was noted. RESULTS: In patients with cervical carcinoma FIGO stage Ia2-IIa treated surgically, the treatment plan was altered due to MRI results in 10/125 patients. In the smaller group of patients with clinically more advanced disease receiving radio-chemotherapy, the treatment plan was altered in 12/58 patients. Reasons for changing the treatment plan after MRI were findings indicating a higher (n = 8) or lower (n = 5) local tumor stage, findings of para aortic nodal disease (n = 4) or difficulty to clinically examine the patient due to obesity (n = 2). MRI was also an aid in deciding whether or not to offer fertility preserving treatment in three cases. CONCLUSION: The use of MRI affects treatment planning in patients with cancer of the uterine cervix. The impact is more obvious in more advanced stages of disease and in patients who are difficult to examine clinically due to, for example body constitution. The result of MRI is also an aid in deciding whether or not a fertility preserving operation is feasible.
Authors: C S Gardner; J Sunil; A H Klopp; C E Devine; T Sagebiel; C Viswanathan; P R Bhosale Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Ali Gholipour; Judith A Estroff; Carol E Barnewolt; Richard L Robertson; P Ellen Grant; Borjan Gagoski; Simon K Warfield; Onur Afacan; Susan A Connolly; Jeffrey J Neil; Adam Wolfberg; Robert V Mulkern Journal: Concepts Magn Reson Part A Bridg Educ Res Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 0.481
Authors: Gaiane M Rauch; Harmeet Kaur; Haesun Choi; Randy D Ernst; Ann H Klopp; Piyaporn Boonsirikamchai; Shannon N Westin; Leonardo P Marcal Journal: Radiographics Date: 2014 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Mohammed A Shweel; Enas A Abdel-Gawad; Ehab Ali Abdel-Gawad; Hosny S Abdelghany; Alshimaa M Abdel-Rahman; Emad M Ibrahim Journal: J Clin Imaging Sci Date: 2012-07-28