Literature DB >> 8696696

Transrectal ultrasound in the evaluation of cervical carcinoma and comparison with spiral computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

W T Yang1, S B Walkden, S Ho, T H Cheung, S K Lam, J Teo, C Metreweli.   

Abstract

38 women with biopsy proven untreated cervical carcinoma were prospectively studied with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), spiral computed tomography (SCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). 20 women had radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy with detailed histological evaluation of the parametra. The echographic features of cervical carcinoma on TRUS are a hypoechoic (60%) or isoechoic (40%) (relative to normal uterine muscle/cervical stroma), poorly defined mass lesion with indistinct margins in an enlarged cervix. This relatively high percentage of isoechoic tumours and relative lack of contrast resolution may pose a problem in the identification of some tumours, and to our knowledge has not been previously reported. Further limitations of TRUS are in the evaluation of advanced cervical cancer, due to bulky tumours rendering poor access to the parametrium and pelvic sidewall. The overall accuracy in staging of early cervical cancer (less than stage 2b) was 85% for examination under anaesthesia (EUA), 75% for TRUS, 65% for MRI and 50% for SCT. The positive predictive value in evaluating the parametra in this group of patients was also lower for SCT (14%) and MRI (33%) compared with TRUS (100%). In the evaluation of advanced cervical cancer (stage 2b or higher), there was poor correlation between TRUS and EUA, with MRI showing the best correlation with EUA. We conclude that SCT is inferior to both TRUS and MRI in the staging of early stage cervical cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8696696     DOI: 10.1259/0007-1285-69-823-610

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  3 in total

1.  MRI-based pre-planning in patients with cervical cancer treated with three-dimensional brachytherapy.

Authors:  M Dolezel; K Odrazka; J Vanasek; T Kohlova; T Kroulik; K Kudelka; D Spitzer; M Mrklovsky; M Tichy; J Zizka; L Jalcova
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis.

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

3.  Nomogram Predicting Overall Survival in Patients with FIGO II to III Squamous Cell Cervical Carcinoma Under Radical Radiotherapy: A Retrospective Analysis Based on 2018 FIGO Staging.

Authors:  Lele Zang; Qin Chen; Xiaozhen Zhang; Xiaohong Zhong; Jian Chen; Yi Fang; An Lin; Min Wang
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2021-12-29       Impact factor: 3.989

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.