Literature DB >> 8088035

Staging, volume estimation and assessment of nodal status in carcinoma of the cervix: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging with surgical findings.

J M Hawnaur1, R J Johnson, C H Buckley, V Tindall, I Isherwood.   

Abstract

Pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was carried out in 50 women scheduled for operative treatment of invasive carcinoma of the cervix. The extent of the primary tumour (stage), its dimensions and the presence of lymph node enlargement were assessed and compared with findings at surgery and/or histopathological examination of the resected uterus. In 45 patients undergoing radical hysterectomy, accuracy of MRI staging of the primary tumour was 84.4%. In the group as a whole, including four patients with inoperable disease, staging accuracy was 84%. Most errors were due to difficulty in identifying early vaginal or parametrial invasion by tumour. There was close correlation between the volume of tumour measured from pre-operative MRI scans and measurements made on the hysterectomy specimen (r = 0.95). MRI had a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 88% in predicting metastatic lymphadenopathy, based solely on the criterion of enlargement of any pelvic or para-aortic nodes to 1.5 cm or greater. However, retrospective analysis of the presence or absence of metastases by site in 49 patients undergoing lymphadenectomy or lymph node sampling at laparotomy showed that true sensitivity to be 57.1% and the specificity 96.8%. Differentiation between malignant and reactive lymphadenopathy was not reliably achieved on MRI, and in several patients, metastases were present in normal-sized lymph nodes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8088035     DOI: 10.1016/s0009-9260(05)81738-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Radiol        ISSN: 0009-9260            Impact factor:   2.350


  10 in total

1.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis. Better techniques can help determine management and predict outcome.

Authors:  J A Spencer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-05-27

2.  Cervical cancer: MR imaging findings before, during, and after radiation therapy.

Authors:  Gulgun Engin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-06-14       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  [Uterine cervical cancer : preoperative staging with magnetic resonance imaging].

Authors:  F Collettini; B Hamm
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 4.  Monitoring tumour response.

Authors:  J E Husband
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Recurrent uterine cancer after surgery: magnetic resonance imaging patterns and their changes after concomitant chemoradiation.

Authors:  R Manfredi; S Baltieri; A Tognolini; R Graziani; D Smaniotto; N Cellini; L Bonomo
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2008-09-08       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 6.  Identification of Tumor-Specific MRI Biomarkers Using Machine Learning (ML).

Authors:  Rima Hajjo; Dima A Sabbah; Sanaa K Bardaweel; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-21

Review 7.  Different imaging techniques for the detection of pelvic lymph nodes metastasis from gynecological malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yi Gong; Qingming Wang; Li Dong; Yiping Jia; Chengge Hua; Fanglin Mi; Chunjie Li
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-02-21

Review 8.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the cervix.

Authors:  Khashayar Rafat Zand; Caroline Reinhold; Hisashi Abe; Sharad Maheshwari; Ahmed Mohamed; Daniel Upegui
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2007-05-28       Impact factor: 3.909

9.  MR staging of endometrial cancer: needed or wanted?

Authors:  John A Spencer; Christina Messiou; Sarah E Swift
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 3.909

10.  Preoperative imaging in patients undergoing trachelectomy for cervical cancer: validation of a combined T2- and diffusion-weighted endovaginal MRI technique at 3.0 T.

Authors:  Katherine Downey; John H Shepherd; Ayoma D Attygalle; Steve Hazell; Veronica A Morgan; Sharon L Giles; Thomas E J Ind; Nandita M Desouza
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 5.482

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.