Literature DB >> 2679852

The impact of computed tomography and ultrasonography on the management of patients with carcinoma of the ovary.

M E Gore1, J C Cooke, E Wiltshaw, J M Crow, D O Cosgrove, C A Parsons.   

Abstract

We have carried out a prospective study on the impact of computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) on the management of patients with carcinoma of the ovary. Seventy-eight CT and 88 US scans were performed on 94 patients. Clinicians decided patient management prospectively at the time the CT and/or US was ordered. Clinical assessment differed from the result obtained by CT or US in 45% of cases (35/78 and 40/88, respectively). CT and US altered patient management in only a minority of cases (14/78, 18% and 9/88, 10% respectively). Even when the scan and clinical assessments differed, management was only altered on 14/35 (40%) occasions after CT and on 9/40 (23%) occasions after US, a difference which was not significant. In patients with clinically undetectable disease, management was altered by CT on 17% of occasions and by US on 10%. We conclude that in patients with carcinoma of the ovary CT and US alters patient management in a minority of cases. In view of current financial restrictions in health care, clinicians should be more selective in the use of these imaging techniques. Furthermore, we recommend that similar prospective studies are performed for other clinical situations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2679852      PMCID: PMC2247304          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1989.352

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  14 in total

1.  Detection of neoplastic involvement of the mesentery and omentum by computed tomography.

Authors:  R G Levitt; S S Sagel; R J Stanley
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Computed tomography diagnosis of mesenteric masses.

Authors:  M E Bernardino; B S Jing; S Wallace
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Comparison of B-mode ultrasonography and computed tomography in gynecologic cancer.

Authors:  C H Nash; D S Alberts; T N Suciu; H R Giles; D A Tobias; R S Waldman
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1979-10       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Observations on the medical efficacy of computed tomography of the chest and abdomen.

Authors:  A H Robbins; R D Pugatch; S G Gerzof; L J Faling; W C Johnson; D H Sewell
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1978-07       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Reporting results of cancer treatment.

Authors:  A B Miller; B Hoogstraten; M Staquet; A Winkler
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1981-01-01       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Ovarian carcinoma follow-up: US versus laparotomy.

Authors:  O Khan; D O Cosgrove; A M Fried; P E Savage
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Abdominal ultrasound in advanced ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  M R Paling; T H Shawker
Journal:  J Clin Ultrasound       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 0.910

8.  Abdomino-pelvic computed tomography in the management of ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  R J Johnson; G Blackledge; B Eddleston; D Crowther
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Use of the computed tomographic whole body scanner to stage and follow patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  N Whitley; D Brenner; A Francis; T Kwon; U Villasanta; J Aisner; P Wiernik; J Whitley
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1981 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.016

10.  Clinical efficacy of computed body tomography, II.

Authors:  J Wittenberg; H V Fineberg; J T Ferrucci; J F Simeone; P R Mueller; E vanSonnenberg; R H Kirkpatrick
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1980-06       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.