Magnetic resonance imaging of the cervix

Cancer Imaging

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 69-76

  Zand, Khashayar Rafat ^a   Reinhold, Caroline ^a,b,c   Abe, Hisashi ^a   Maheshwari, Sharad ^a   Mohamed, Ahmed ^a   Upegui, Daniel ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY HEALTH CENTRE   (Canada)

^b SYNARC INC   (United States)

^c MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; MR imaging; Staging

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; ULTRASMALL SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON OXIDE;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; BLADDER METASTASIS; BRACHYTHERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CRYOSURGERY; ELECTROSURGERY; ENDOMETRIUM ABLATION; HUMAN; HYSTERECTOMY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INDIVIDUALIZATION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LIVER METASTASIS; LUNG METASTASIS; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RADIOLOGIST; RECTUM CANCER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT PLANNING; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; FEMALE; LYMPH NODE; PATHOLOGY; REVIEW; TUMOR RECURRENCE; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR;

FEMALE; HUMANS; HYSTERECTOMY; LYMPH NODES; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 34250170159     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14707330     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1102/1470-7330.2007.0011     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Hricak H, Yu KK. Radiology in invasive cervical cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167: 1101-8.
2. Stehman F, Bundy B, DiSaia P, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix treated with irradiation therapy: I. A multivariate analysis of prognostic variables in the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Cancer 1991; 67: 2776-85.
3. Kupets R, Covens A. Is the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for cervical carcinoma able to predict survival in patients with cervical carcinoma? An assessment of clinimetric properties. Cancer 2001; 92: 796-804.
4. Yuan CC, Wang PH, Lai CR, Yen MS, Chen CY, Juang CM. Prognosis-predicting system based on factors related to survival of cervical carcinoma. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1998; 63: 163-7.
5. Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Chi DS, et al. Role of imaging in pretreatment evaluation of early invasive cervical cancer: results of the intergroup study American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6651-Gynecologic Oncology Group 183. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 9329-37.
6. Amendola MA, Hricak H, Mitchell DG, et al. Utilization of diagnostic studies in the pretreatment evaluation of invasive cervical cancer in the United States: results of intergroup protocol ACRIN 6651/ GOG 183. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7454-9.
7. Pannu HK, Fishman EK. Evaluation of cervical cancer by computed tomography: current status. Cancer 2003; 98(9 Suppl): 2039-43.
8. Scheidler J, Heuck AF. Imaging of cancer of the cervix. Radiol Clin North Am. 2002; 40: 577-90vii.
9. Hricak H. Widespread use of MRI in gynecology: a myth or reality? Abdom. Imaging 1997; 22: 579-88.
10. Fujiwara K, Yoden E, Asakawa T, et al. Negative MRI findings with invasive cervical biopsy may indicate stage IA cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2000; 79: 451-6.
11. Seki H, Azumi R, Kimura M, Sakai K. Stromal invasion by carcinoma of the cervix: assessment with dynamic MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168: 1579-85.
12. Kim SH, Choi BI, Han JK, et al. Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MR imaging in 99 patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17: 633-40.
13. Kim SH, Choi BI, Lee HP, et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MR findings. Radiology 1990; 175: 45-51.
14. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, Chang YC, Winkler ML, Stern JL. Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MRI and surgical findings. Radiology 1988; 166: 623-31.
15. Lien HH, Blomlie V, Kjorstad K, Abeler V, Kaalhus O. Clinical stage I carcinoma of the cervix: value of MRI in determining degree of invasiveness. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991; 156: 1191-4.
16. Sironi S, Belloni C, Taccagni GL, Del Maschio A. Carcinoma of the cervix: value of MRI in detecting parametrial involvement. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991; 156: 753-6.
17. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Sagoh T, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: staging with MRI. Radiology 1989; 171: 245-51.
18. Iwata. S, Joja I, Okuno K, et al. Cervical carcinoma with full-thickness stromal invasion: efficacy of dynamic MR imaging in the assessment of parametrial involvement. Radiat Med 2002; 20: 247-55.
19. Shiraiwa M, Joja I, Asakawa T, et al. Cervical carcinoma: efficacy of thin-section oblique axial T2-weighted images for evaluating parametrial invasion. Abdom Imaging 1999; 24: 514-9.
20. Sironi S, De Cobelli F, Scarfone G, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: value of plain and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging in assessing degree of invasiveness. Radiology 1993; 188: 797-801.
21. Scheidler J, Heuck AF, Steinborn M, Kimmig R, Reiser MF. Parametrial invasion in cervical carcinoma: evaluation of detection at MRI with fat suppression. Radiology 1998; 206: 125-9.
22. Sheu M, Chang C, Wang J, Yen M. MR staging of clinical stage I and IIa cervical carcinoma: a reappraisal of efficacy and pitfalls. Eur J Radiol 2001; 38: 225-31.
23. Hawighorst H, Knapstein PG, Weikel W, et al. Cervical carcinoma: comparison of standard and pharmokinetic MR imaging. Radiology 1996; 201: 531-9.
24. Kaur H, Silverman PM, Iyer RB, Verschraegen CF, Eifel PJ, Charnsangavej C. Diagnosis, staging, and surveillance of cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 1621-31.
25. Burghardt E, Baltzer J, Tulusan AH, Haas J. Results of surgical treatment of 1028 cervical cancers studied with volumetry. Cancer 1992; 70: 648-55.
26. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L, Stern JL. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 86: 43-50.
27. Hawnaur JM, Johnson RJ, Buckley CH, Tindall V, Isherwood I. Staging, volume estimation, and assessment of nodal status in carcinoma of the cervix: comparison of magnetic imaging with surgical findings. Clin Radiol 1994; 49: 443-52.
28. Hayashi T, Kato T. Usefulness of tumor size on MR imaging in assessing the prognosis of uterine cervical cancer treated with radiation. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi. 1999; 59: 250-5 (in Japanese).
29. Togashi K, Morikawa K, Kataoka LM, Konishi J. Cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8: 391-7.
30. Boss EA, Barentsz JO, Massuger LF, Boonstra H. The role of MR imaging in invasive cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2000; 10: 256-70.
31. Okamoto Y, Tanaka YO, Nishida M, Tsunoda H, Yoshikawa H, Itai Y. MR imaging of the uterine cervix: imaging-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2003; 23: 425-45(quiz 534-5).
32. Narayan K, McKenzie A, Fisher R, Susil B, Jobling T, Bernshaw D. Estimation of tumor volume in cervical cancer by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Clin Oncol 2003; 26: e163-8.
33. Kim SH, Han MC. Invasion of the urinary bladder by uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation with MR imaging. AJR 1997; 168: 393-7.
34. Landoni F, Maneo A, Colombo A, et al. Randomised study of radical surgery versus radiotherapy for stage Ib-IIa cervical cancer. Lancet 1997; 350: 535-40.
35. Bjornsson BJ, Nelson BE, Reale FR, Rose PG. Accuracy of frozen section for lymph node metastasis in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 51: 50-3.
36. Delgado G, Bundy BN, Fowler WC, et al. A prospective surgical pathological study of stage I squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 35: 314-20.
37. Inoue T. Prognostic significance of the depth of invasion relating to nodal metastases, parametrial extension, and cell types. A study of 628 cases with stage IB, IIA and IIB cervical carcinoma. Cancer 1984; 54: 3035-42.
38. Trattner M, Graf AH, Lax S, et al. Prognostic factors in surgically treated stage Ib-IIb cervical carcinomas with special emphasis on the importance of tumor volume. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 82: 11-16.
39. Vinnicombe SJ, Norman AR, Nicolson V, Husband JE. Normal pelvic lymph nodes: evaluation with CT after bipedal lymphangiography. Radiology 1995; 194: 349-55.
40. Magnusson A. Size of normal retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Acta Radiol Diagn 1983; 24: 315-18.
41. Lien HH. MR imaging of invasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Acta Radiol 1999; 40: 236-45.
42. Kim SH, Kim SC, Byung IC, Han MC. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 190: 807-11.
43. Roy C, Le Bras Y, Mangold L, et al Small pelvic lymph node metastases: evaluation with MR imaging. Clin Radiol 1997; 52: 437-40.
44. Vassallo P, Matei C, Heston WD, McLachlan SJ, Koutcher JA, Castellino RA. Characterization of reactive versus tumor-bearing lymph nodes with interstitial magnetic resonance lymphography in an animal model. Invest Radiol 1995; 30: 706-11.
45. Bellin MF, Roy C, Kinkel K, et al. Lymph node metastases: safety and effectiveness of MR imaging with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles - initial clinical experience. Radiology 1998; 207: 799-808.
46. Rockall AG, Sohaib SA, Harisinghani MG, et al. Diagnostic performance of nanoparticle-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of lymph node metastases in patients with endometrial and cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 2813-21.
47. Sugawara Y, Eisbruch A, Kosuda S, et al. Evaluation of FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 1125-31.
48. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D, et al. Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: Detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 2001; 218: 776-82.
49. Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA. FDG-PET evaluation of carcinoma of the cervix. Clin Positron Imaging 1999; 2: 105-9.
50. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 3745-9.
51. Tsai CS, Chang TC, Lai CH, et al. Preliminary report of using FDG-PET to detect extrapelvic lesions in cervical cancer patients with enlarged pelvic lymph nodes on MRI/CT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 58: 1506-12.
52. Herzog TJ. New approaches for the management of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 90: 3 Pt 2S22-7.
53. Waggoner SE. Cervical cancer. Lancet 2003; 361: 2217-25.
54. Tseng CJ, Horng SG, Soong YK, Hsueh S, Hsieh CH, Lin HW. Conservative conization for microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176: 1009-10.
55. Morice P, Castaigne D. Advances in the surgical management of invasive cervical cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2005; 17: 5-12.
56. Peppercorn PD, Jeyarajah AR, Woolas R, et al. Role of MR imaging in the selection of patients with early cervical carcinoma for fertility-preserving surgery: initial experience. Radiology 1999; 212: 395-9.
57. Grisaru DA, Covens A, Franssen E, et al. Histopathologic score predicts recurrence free survival after radical surgery in patients with stage IA2-IB1_2 cervical carcinoma. Cancer 2003; 97: 1904-8.
58. Ho CM, Chien TY, Huang SH, et al. Multivariate analysis of the prognostic factors and outcomes in early cervical cancer patients undergoing radical trachelectomy. Gynecol Oncol 2004; 93: 458-64.
59. Green JA, Kirwan JM, Tierney JF, et al. Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2001; 358: 781-6.
60. Stehman FB, Rose PG, Greer BE, et al. Innovations in the treatment of invasive cervical cancer. Cancer 2003; 98(9 Suppl): 2052-63.
61. Heron CW, Husband JE, Williams MP, Dobbs HJ, Cosgrove DO. The value of CT in the diagnosis of recurrent carcinoma of the cervix. Clin Radiol 1988; 39: 496-501.
62. Walsh JW, Amendola MA, Hall DJ, Tisnado J, Goplerud DR. Recurrent carcinoma of the cervix: CT diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1981; 136: 117-122.
63. Sugimura K, Okizuka H. Postsurgical Pelvis: treatment follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am 2002; 40: 659-80.
64. Pannu HK, Corl FM, Fishman EK. CT evaluation of cervical cancer: spectrum of disease. RadioGraphics 2001; 21: 1155-68.
65. Weber TM, Sostman HD, Spritzer CE, et al. Cervical carcinoma: determination of recurrent tumor extent versus radiation changes with MR imaging. Radiology 1995; 194: 135-9.
66. Flueckiger F, Ebner F, Poschauko H, Tamussino K, Einspieler R, Ranner G. Cervical cancer: serial MR imaging before and after primary radiation therapy - a 2-year follow-up study. Radiology 1992; 184: 89-93.
67. Hricak H, Swift PS, Campos Z, Quivey JM, Gildengorin V, Goranson H. Irradiation of the cervix uteri: value of unenhanced and contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1993; 189: 381-8.
68. Yamashita Y, Harada M, Torashima M, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of recurrent postoperative cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6: 167-71.
69. Williams MP, Husband JE, Heron CW, Cherryman GR, Koslin DB. Magnetic resonance imaging in recurrent carcinoma of the cervix. Br J Radiol 1989; 62: 544-50.
70. Kinkel K, Ariche M, Tardivon AA, et al. Differentiation between recurrent tumor and benign conditions after treatment of gynecologic pelvic carcinoma: value of dynamic contrast enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 204: 55-63.
71. Hawighorst H, Knapstein PG, Schaeffer U, et al. Pelvic lesions in patients with treated cervical carcinoma: efficacy of pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR images in distinguishing recurrent tumors from benign conditions. Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166: 401-8.
72. De Graef M, Karam R, Juhan V, Daclin PY, Maubon AJ, Rouanet JP. High signals in the uterine cervix on T2-weighted MRI sequences. Eur Radiol 2003; 13: 118-26.
73. Ebner F, Tamussino K, Kressel HY. Magnetic resonance imaging in cervical carcinoma: diagnosis, staging, and follow-up. Magn Reson Q 1994: 22-42.