Literature DB >> 30719553

Comparison of the determination of the local tumor extent of primary endometrial cancer using clinical examination and 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging compared to histopathology.

Kerstin A Brocker1, Jan P Radtke2, Peter Hallscheidt3, Christof Sohn4, Heinz Peter Schlemmer2, Céline D Alt5,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to analyze the correct staging of primary endometrial cancer (EC) using clinical examination and 3 Tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results compared to histopathology.
METHODS: In this prospective, non-randomized, single-center study, 26 women with biopsy-proven EC were evaluated. All women underwent clinical examination including transvaginal ultrasound (CE/US) and 3T MRI (T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences) prior to surgery. Spearman's correlation coefficient was employed to analyze the correlation between both staging methods and histopathology and generalized estimation equation analysis to compare their staging results. Main outcome measures are determinations of local tumor extent for EC on CE/US and 3T MRI compared to histopathology (gold standard).
RESULTS: Sixteen women had an early-stage pT1a tumor, 10 a locally advanced ≥ pT1b tumor. The early stage was correctly diagnosed at CE/US in 100%, by MRI in 81%. Spearman's correlation coefficient was r = 1.0 (p < 0.001) for correlation of CE/US and histopathology, r = 0.93 (p < 0.001) for correlation of MRI and pathology. A locally advanced tumor stage was exactly diagnosed by MRI in 70% and at CE/US in 50%.
CONCLUSIONS: CE/US is sufficient for staging T1a endometrial cancer, while MRI provides higher sensitivity in detecting locally advanced tumors. Based on our results, combining CE/US and 3T MRI in patients with at least suspected deep myometrial invasion offers a more reliable workflow for individual treatment planning.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging; Endometrial cancer staging; Myometrial invasion; Ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30719553     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-019-05072-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  3 in total

1.  ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Nicole Concin; Carien L Creutzberg; Ignace Vergote; David Cibula; Mansoor Raza Mirza; Simone Marnitz; Jonathan A Ledermann; Tjalling Bosse; Cyrus Chargari; Anna Fagotti; Christina Fotopoulou; Antonio González-Martín; Sigurd F Lax; Domenica Lorusso; Christian Marth; Philippe Morice; Remi A Nout; Dearbhaile E O'Donnell; Denis Querleu; Maria Rosaria Raspollini; Jalid Sehouli; Alina E Sturdza; Alexandra Taylor; Anneke M Westermann; Pauline Wimberger; Nicoletta Colombo; François Planchamp; Xavier Matias-Guiu
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 4.064

2.  Diagnostic accuracy and economic impact of three work-up strategies identifying risk groups in endometrial cancer, fully incorporating sentinel lymph node algorithm.

Authors:  A A Novelli; A Puppo; M Ceccaroni; E Olearo; G Monterossi; G Mantovani; S Pelligra; P L Olearo; F Fanfani; G Scambia
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2020-10-08

3.  Efficacy of transvaginal ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer: a prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Anis Cerovac; Dzenita Ljuca; Lejla Arnautalic; Dubravko Habek; Gordana Bogdanovic; Jasminka Mustedanagic-Mujanovic; Gordana Grgic
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 2.991

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.