Lucia Manganaro1, Yulia Lakhman2, Nishat Bharwani3,4, Benedetta Gui5, Silvia Gigli6, Valeria Vinci7, Stefania Rizzo8, Aki Kido9, Teresa Margarida Cunha10, Evis Sala11, Andrea Rockall12,13, Rosemarie Forstner14, Stephanie Nougaret15,16. 1. Department of Radiology, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, 3rd Floor, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Building, Praed St, W21NY, London, UK. lucia.manganaro@uniroma1.it. 2. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 3. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK. 4. Department of Radiology, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, 3rd Floor, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Building, Praed St., London, W21NY, UK. 5. Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, UOC Radiologia Generale ed Interventistica Generale, Area Diagnostica per Immagini, Dipartimento Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Rome, Italy. 6. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Sandro Pertini Hospital, Via dei Monti Tiburtini, 385, 00157, Rome, Italy. 7. Department of Radiology, Aerospace Medical Institute, Viale Piero Gobetti, Rome, Italy. 8. Department of Radiology, Università della Svizzera Italiana (USI), EOC via Tesserete 46, Lugano, 6900, Switzerland. 9. Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Hospital, 54 Shogoin-Kawaharacho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. 10. Department of Radiology, Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, R. Prof. Lima Basto, 1099-023, Lisbon Codex, Portugal. 11. Department of Radiology, Cambridge Biomedical Campus Cambridge, Box 218, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. 12. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College, London, UK. 13. Department of Radiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK. 14. Department of Radiology, PMU, Müllner Hauptstr, 48 Universitätsklinikum, 5020, Salzburg, Austria. 15. Department of Radiology, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France. 16. INSERM, Montpellier Cancer Research Institute, U1194, University of Montpellier, 208 Avenue des Apothicaires, 34295, Montpellier, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The recommendations cover indications for MRI examination including acquisition planes, patient preparation, imaging protocol including multi-parametric approaches such as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI-MR), dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE-MR) and standardised reporting. The document also underscores the value of whole-body 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and highlights potential future methods. METHODS: In 2019, the ESUR female pelvic imaging working group reviewed the revised 2018 FIGO staging system, the up-to-date clinical management guidelines, and the recent imaging literature. The RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was followed to develop the current ESUR consensus guidelines following methodological steps: literature research, questionnaire developments, panel selection, survey, data extraction and analysis. RESULTS: The updated ESUR guidelines are recommendations based on ≥ 80% consensus among experts. If ≥ 80% agreement was not reached, the action was indicated as optional. CONCLUSIONS: The present ESUR guidelines focus on the main role of MRI in the initial staging, response monitoring and evaluation of disease recurrence. Whole-body FDG-PET plays an important role in the detection of lymph nodes (LNs) and distant metastases. KEY POINTS: • T2WI and DWI-MR are now recommended for initial staging, monitoring of response and evaluation of recurrence. • DCE-MR is optional; its primary role remains in the research setting. • T2WI, DWI-MRI and whole-body FDG-PET/CT enable comprehensive assessment of treatment response and recurrence.
OBJECTIVES: The recommendations cover indications for MRI examination including acquisition planes, patient preparation, imaging protocol including multi-parametric approaches such as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI-MR), dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE-MR) and standardised reporting. The document also underscores the value of whole-body 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and highlights potential future methods. METHODS: In 2019, the ESUR female pelvic imaging working group reviewed the revised 2018 FIGO staging system, the up-to-date clinical management guidelines, and the recent imaging literature. The RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was followed to develop the current ESUR consensus guidelines following methodological steps: literature research, questionnaire developments, panel selection, survey, data extraction and analysis. RESULTS: The updated ESUR guidelines are recommendations based on ≥ 80% consensus among experts. If ≥ 80% agreement was not reached, the action was indicated as optional. CONCLUSIONS: The present ESUR guidelines focus on the main role of MRI in the initial staging, response monitoring and evaluation of disease recurrence. Whole-body FDG-PET plays an important role in the detection of lymph nodes (LNs) and distant metastases. KEY POINTS: • T2WI and DWI-MR are now recommended for initial staging, monitoring of response and evaluation of recurrence. • DCE-MR is optional; its primary role remains in the research setting. • T2WI, DWI-MRI and whole-body FDG-PET/CT enable comprehensive assessment of treatment response and recurrence.
Authors: Corinne Balleyguier; E Sala; T Da Cunha; A Bergman; B Brkljacic; F Danza; R Forstner; B Hamm; R Kubik-Huch; C Lopez; R Manfredi; J McHugo; L Oleaga; K Togashi; K Kinkel Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-11-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Maarten G Thomeer; Cees Gerestein; Sandra Spronk; Helena C van Doorn; Els van der Ham; Myriam G Hunink Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Thomas De Perrot; Christine Sadjo Zoua; Carl G Glessgen; Diomidis Botsikas; Lena Berchtold; Rares Salomir; Sophie De Seigneux; Harriet C Thoeny; Jean-Paul Vallée Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-03-30 Impact factor: 4.241