Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: Results of prospective study

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

Volumn 28, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 620-627

  Choi, Seung Hong ^a   Kim, Seung Hyup ^a,b   Choi, Hyuck Jae ^a   Park, Byung Kwan ^a   Lee, Hak Jong ^a  

^a Seoul National University Hospital   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging; Staging; Uterine cervical carcinoma

Indexed keywords

DISEASES; MAGNETISM; RESONANCE;

CERVICAL CARCINOMA; HIGH-ACCURACY; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; STAGING; TUMOR STAGING; UTERINE CERVICAL CANCER; UTERINE CERVICAL CARCINOMA;

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER STAGING; DEVICE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA;

EID: 4444228951     PISSN: 03638715     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rct.0000138007.77725.0a     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Reinhold C, Gallix BP, Ascher SM. Uterus and cervix. In: Semelka RC, Ascher SM, Reinhold C, eds. MRI of the Abdomen and Pelvis: A Text Atlas. New York: Wiley-Liss; 1997:585-660.
2. McCarthy S, Hricak H. The uterus and vagina. In: Higgins CB, Hricak H, Helms CA, eds. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Body. 3rd ed. New York: Lippincott-Raven, 1997:761-814.
3. Togashi K, Morikawa K, Kataoka ML, et al. Cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1998;8:391-397.
4. Kim SH, Choi BI, Lee HP, et al. Uterine cervix carcinoma: comparison of CT and MR findings. Radiology. 1990;175:45-51.
5. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Sagoh T, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: staging with MR imaging. Radiology. 1989;171:245-251.
6. Kim SH, Choi BI, Han JK, et al. Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MRI in 99 patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993;17:633-640.
7. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell B, et al. Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86:43-50.
8. Fuller AF, Jr, Elliott N, Kosloff C, et al. Determinants of increased risk for recurrence in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy for stage IB and IIA carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;33:34-39.
9. Hopkins MP, Morley GW. Stage IB squamous cell cancer of the cervix: clinicopathologic features related to survival. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 164:1520-1529.
10. Delgado G. Lymphovascular space involvement in cervical cancer: an independent risk factor. Gynecol Oncol. 1998;68:219.
11. Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, et al. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol. 1990;38:352-357.
12. Nicolet V, Carignan L, Bourdon F, et al. MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach. Radiographics. 2000;20:1539-1549.
13. Takeda N, Sakuragi N, Takeda M, et al. Multivariate analysis of histopathologic prognostic factors for invasive cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002;81:1144-1151.
14. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, et al. Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology. 1988;166: 623-631.
15. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Itoh K, et al. Uterine cervical cancer: assessment with high-field MR imaging. Radiology. 1986;160:431-435.
16. Ho CM, Chien TY, Jeng CM, et al. Staging of cervical cancer: comparison between magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and pelvic examination under anesthesia. J Formos Med Assoc. 1992;91:982-990.
17. Waggenspack GA, Amparo EG, Hannigan EV. MR imaging of uterine cervical carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1988;12:409-414.
18. Janus CL, Mendelson DS, Moore S, et al. Staging of cervical carcinoma: accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Clin Imaging. 1989;13:114-116.
19. Greco A, Mason P, Leung AW, et al. Staging of carcinoma of the uterine cervix: MRI-surgical correlation. Clin Radiol. 1989;40:401-405.
20. Sironi S, Belloni C, Taccagni GL, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: value of MR imaging in detecting parametrial involvement. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;156:753-756.
21. Lien HH, Blomlie V, Kjorstad K, et al. Clinical stage I carcinoma of the cervix: value of MR imaging in determining degree of invasiveness. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;156:1191-1194.
22. Ebner F, Tamussino K, Kressel HY. Magnetic resonance imaging in cervical carcinoma: diagnosis, staging, and follow-up. Magn Reson Q. 1994; 10:22-42.
23. Angel C, Beecham JB, Rubens DJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic correlation in stage IB cervix cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 1987; 27:357-367.
24. Rubens D, Thombury JR, Angel C, et al. Stage IB cervical carcinoma: comparison of clinical, MR, and pathologic staging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988;150:135-138.
25. Hricak H, Hamm B, Semelka RC, et al. Carcinoma of the uterus: use of gadopentetate dimeglumine in MR imaging. Radiology. 1991;181:95-106.
26. 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.
27. Hricak H, Swift PS, Campos Z, et al. Irradiation of the cervix uteri: value of unenhanced and contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 1993;189: 381-388.
28. Troiano RN, Lange RC, McCarthy S. Conspicuity of normal and pathologic female pelvic anatomy: comparison of gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images and fast spin echo T2-weighted images. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1996;20:871-877.
29. Yamashita Y, Takahashi M, Sawada T, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: dynamic MR imaging. Radiology. 1992;182:643-648.
30. Ito K, Fujita T, Uchisako H, et al. MR imaging of the uterus: findings from high-resolution multisection dynamic imaging with a surface coil. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;163:873-879.
31. Yamashita Y, Harada M, Torashima M, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of recurrent postoperative cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1996;6: 167-171.
32. Seki H, Azumi R, Kimura M, et al. Stromal invasion by carcinoma of the cervix: assessment with dynamic MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168:1579-1585.
33. 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.
34. Boss EA, Barentsz JO, Massuger LF, et al. The role of MR imaging in invasive cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2000;10:256-270.
35. Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI, et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology. 1994;190: 807.
36. Kim SH, Han MC. Invasion of the urinary bladder by uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 168:393-397.