Node-by-node correlation between MR and PET/CT in patients with uterine cervical cancer: Diffusion-weighted imaging versus size-based criteria on T2WI

European Radiology

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 2024-2032

  Choi, Eugene K ^a,b   Kim, Jeong Kon ^a   Choi, Hyuck Jae ^a   Park, Seong Ho ^a   Park, Bum Woo ^a   Kim, Namkug ^a   Kim, Jae Seung ^a   Im, Ki Chun ^a   Cho, Gyunggoo ^c   Cho, Kyoung Sik ^a  

^a University of Ulsan   (South Korea)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c Korea Basic Science Institute (KBSI)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Comparative study; Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Lymph nodes; Lymphatic metastasis; Uterine cervical neoplasms

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PELVIS LYMPH NODE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR VOLUME; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPH NODES; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICS AS TOPIC; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 67650898559     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1350-5     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Kamura T, Tsukamoto N, Tsuruchi N et al (1992) Multivariate analysis of the histopathologic prognostic factors of cervical cancer in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy. Cancer 69:181-186
2. Inoue T, Morita K (1990) The prognostic significance of number of positive nodes in cervical carcinoma stages IB, IIA, and IIB. Cancer 65:1923-1927
3. Girardi F, Haas J (1993) The importance of the histologic processing of pelvic lymph nodes in the treatment of cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 3:12-17
4. Michel G, Morice P, Castaigne D et al (1998) Lymphatic spread in stage Ib and II cervical carcinoma: Anatomy and surgical implications. Obstet Gynecol 91:360-363
5. Bellomi M, Bonomo G, Landoni F et al (2005) Accuracy of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of lymph node involvement in cervix carcinoma. Eur Radiol 15:2469-2474
6. Bipat S, Glas AS, van der Velden J et al (2003) Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: A systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 91:6059-6066
7. Choi HJ, Kim SH, Seo SS et al (2006) MRI for pretreatment lymph node staging in uterine cervical cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:W538-W543
8. Choi HJ, Roh JW, Seo SS et al (2006) Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma: A prospective study. Cancer 106:914-922
9. Kim SH, Choi BI, Han JK et al (1993) Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: Comparison of CT and MRI in 99 patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr 17:633-640
10. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D et al (2001) Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: Detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 218:776-782
11. Roy C, Le Bras Y, Mangold L et al (1997) Small pelvic lymph node metastases: Evaluation with MR imaging. Clin Radiol 52:437-440
12. Williams AD, Cousins C, Soutter WP et al (2001) Detection of pelvic lymph node metastases in gynecologic malignancy: A comparison of CT, MR imaging, and positron emission tomography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:343-348
13. Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY et al (2000) Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:759-766
14. Kim JK, Kim KA, Park BW et al (2008) Feasibility of diffusion-weighted imaging in the differentiation of metastatic from nonmetastatic lymph nodes: Early experience. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:714-719
15. Lin G, Ho KC, Wang JJ et al (2008) Detection of lymph node metastasis in cervical and uterine cancers by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:128-135
16. Nakai G, Matsuki M, Inada Y et al (2008) Detection and evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with gynecologic malignancies using body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32:764-768
17. Sironi S, Buda A, Picchio M et al (2006) Lymph node metastasis in patients with clinical early-stage cervical cancer: Detection with integrated FDG PET/CT. Radiology 238:272-279
18. Sugawara Y, Eisbruch A, Kosuda S et al (1999) Evaluation of FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 40:1125-1131
19. Schoder H, Yeung HW, Gonen M et al (2004) Head and neck cancer: Clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology 231:65-72
20. Hein PA, Kremser C, Judmaier W et al (2003) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for monitoring diffusion changes in rectal carcinoma during combined, preoperative chemoradiation: Preliminary results of a prospective study. Eur J Radiol 45:214-222
21. Kim JK, Kim KA, Park BW et al (2008) Feasibility of diffusion weighted imaging in the differentiation of metastatic from non-metastatic lymph nodes: Early experience. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:714-719
22. Naganawa S, Sato C, Kumada H et al (2005) Apparent diffusion coefficient in cervical cancer of the uterus: Comparison with the normal uterine cervix. Eur Radiol 15:71-78
23. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1983) A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148:839-843
24. Bewick V, Cheek L, Ball J (2004) Statistics review 13: Receiver operating characteristic curves. Crit Care 8:508-512
25. Sakuragi N, Satoh C, Takeda N et al (1999) Incidence and distribution pattern of pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with Stages IB, IIA, and IIB cervical carcinoma treated with radical hysterectomy. Cancer 85:1547-1554
26. Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI et al (1994) Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology 190:807-811
27. Harisinghani MG, Barentsz J, Hahn PF et al (2003) Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 348:2491-2499
28. Choi SH, Kim SH, Choi HJ et al (2004) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: Results of prospective study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 28:620-627
29. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG et al (1988) Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology 166:623-631
30. Kim JH, Beets GL, Kim MJ et al (2004) High-resolution MR imaging for nodal staging in rectal cancer: Are there any criteria in addition to the size? Eur J Radiol 52:78-83
31. Chen AC, Sung WH, Wang PH et al (2002) Correlation of three-dimensional tumor volumetry with cervical cancer prognostic parameters. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 23:401-404
32. Kodaira T, Fuwa N, Toita T et al (2003) Comparison of prognostic value of MRI and FIGO stage among patients with cervical carcinoma treated with radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56:769-777
33. Sumi M, Sakihama N, Sumi T et al (2003) Discrimination of metastatic cervical lymph nodes with diffusion-weighted MR imaging in patients with head and neck cancer. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 24:1627-1634
34. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E et al (2008) Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/ CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1652-1658
35. DeLano MC, Cooper TG, Siebert JE et al (2000) High-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging of adult brain: Image contrast and apparent diffusion coefficient map features. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 21:1830-1836