Literature DB >> 8888254

Cervical carcinoma: comparison of standard and pharmacokinetic MR imaging.

H Hawighorst1, P G Knapstein, W Weikel, M V Knopp, U Schaeffer, G Brix, M Essig, U Hoffmann, I Zuna, S Schönberg, G van Kaick.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To stage advanced cervical carcinoma with conventional or pharmacokinetic magnetic resonance (MR) imaging by correlating imaging findings with whole-mount specimens and histopathologic findings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-six adult patients with primary cervical cancer (stages IIB-IVA) underwent T2-weighted turbo spin-echo (SE) MR imaging; gadolinium-enhanced, T1-weighted SE MR imaging; and gadolinium-enhanced, saturation-recovery, turbo fast low-angle shot MR imaging. All imaging findings were correlated with the whole-mount specimens and histopathologic findings. Signal intensity changes versus time were analyzed by using a pharmacokinetic model and parameter values displayed as a color-coded overlay.
RESULTS: Histopathologic stages were IIB (n = 9), IIIB (n = 1), and IVA (n = 16). The overall accuracy for tumor staging was 73% for T2-weighted, 81% for T1-weighted, and 92% for pharmacokinetic MR imaging. Pharmacokinetic MR imaging was accurate (90%) in the diagnosis of tumor extension into the bladder and/or rectal wall but inaccurate (69%) in that of parametrial invasion. T2-weighted images were most accurate (86%) in the assessment of parametrial tumor extension but less accurate (69%) in that of bladder or rectal invasion.
CONCLUSION: T2-weighted turbo SE images are still superior to contract medium-enhanced T1-weighted SE or pharmacokinetic MR images in the diagnosis of parametrial infiltration by uterine cervical carcinoma. However, pharmacokinetic MR imaging is a promising method for demonstrating and staging IVA disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8888254     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.201.2.8888254

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  10 in total

1.  Recurrent inverted papilloma: diagnosis with pharmacokinetic dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  P H Lai; C F Yang; H B Pan; M T Wu; S T Chu; L P Ger; W C Huang; C C Hsu; C N Lee
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  [Dynamic magnetic resonance tomography (dMRT). It's value in advanced head-neck tumors treated with radiochemotherapy].

Authors:  M Helbig; H-P Schlemmer; M Lumer; M V Knopp; A Dietz
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2003-04-09       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  Value of diffusion-weighted imaging in predicting parametrial invasion in stage IA2-IIA cervical cancer.

Authors:  Jung Jae Park; Chan Kyo Kim; Sung Yoon Park; Byung Kwan Park; Bohyun Kim
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  Current status of body MR imaging: fast MR imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging.

Authors:  Takashi Koyama; Ken Tamai; Kaori Togashi
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Cervical carcinoma: standard and pharmacokinetic analysis of time-intensity curves for assessment of tumor angiogenesis and patient survival.

Authors:  H Hawighorst; P G Knapstein; M V Knopp; P Vaupel; G van Kaick
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 6.  Primary vaginal cancer: role of MRI in diagnosis, staging and treatment.

Authors:  C S Gardner; J Sunil; A H Klopp; C E Devine; T Sagebiel; C Viswanathan; P R Bhosale
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-05-12       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 7.  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

8.  Optimization of MR imaging for pretreatment evaluation of patients with endometrial and cervical cancer.

Authors:  Gaiane M Rauch; Harmeet Kaur; Haesun Choi; Randy D Ernst; Ann H Klopp; Piyaporn Boonsirikamchai; Shannon N Westin; Leonardo P Marcal
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.333

9.  Assessment of metastatic cervical adenopathy using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Nancy J Fischbein; Susan M Noworolski; Roland G Henry; Michael J Kaplan; William P Dillon; Sarah J Nelson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 10.  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

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.