Radiological Assessment of Gynecologic Malignancies

Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 45-68

  Bell, Daniel J ^a   Pannu, Harpreet K ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Gynecology; Magnetic resonance imaging; Malignancy; Sonography; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ADENOMYOSIS; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; CLEAR CELL CARCINOMA; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOMETRIUM BIOPSY; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; ENDOMETRIUM TUMOR; HUMAN; HYDROSALPINX; HYSTERECTOMY; HYSTEROGRAPHY; HYSTEROSCOPY; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE QUALITY; LAPAROTOMY; LYMPHADENECTOMY; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OMENTECTOMY; OVARIECTOMY; OVARY CARCINOMA; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; POSTMENOPAUSE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SALPINGOOOPHORECTOMY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; TERATOMA; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE PAPILLARY SEROUS CARCINOMA;

EID: 79952665767     PISSN: 08898545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ogc.2011.02.003     Document Type: Review

References (96)

1. American Cancer Society Cancer facts and figures 2009, American Cancer Society, Atlanta (GA).
2. Mendivil A., Schuler K.M., Gehrig P.A. Non-endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterine corpus: a review of selected histological subtypes. Cancer Control 2009, 16:46-52.
3. Prat J., Gallardo A., Cuatrecasas M., et al. Endometrial carcinoma: pathology and genetics. Pathology 2007, 39:72-87.
4. Peungjesada S., Bhosale P.R., Balachandran A., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of endometrial carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2009, 33:601-608.
5. Goldstein R.B., Bree R.L., Benson C.B., et al. Evaluation of the woman with postmenopausal bleeding: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound-Sponsored Consensus Conference statement. J Ultrasound Med 2001, 20:1025-1036.
6. Smith-Bindman R., Kerlikowske K., Feldstein V.A., et al. Endovaginal ultrasound to exclude endometrial cancer and other endometrial abnormalities. JAMA 1998, 280:1510-1517.
7. Laifer-Narin S., Ragavendra N., Parmenter E.K., et al. False-normal appearance of the endometrium on conventional transvaginal sonography: comparison with saline hysterosonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002, 178:129-133.
8. Bree R.L., Bowerman R.A., Bohm-Velez M., et al. US evaluation of the uterus in patients with postmenopausal bleeding: a positive effect on diagnostic decision making. Radiology 2000, 216:260-264.
9. Davidson K.G., Dubinsky T.J. Ultrasonographic evaluation of the endometrium in postmenopausal vaginal bleeding. Radiol Clin North Am 2003, 41:769-780.
10. Dubinsky T.J., Stroehlein K., Abu-Ghazzeh Y., et al. Prediction of benign and malignant endometrial disease: hysterosonographic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1999, 210:393-397.
11. Frei K.A., Kinkel K. Staging endometrial cancer: role of magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001, 13:850-855.
12. Manfredi R., Gui B., Maresca G., et al. Endometrial cancer: magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Imaging 2005, 30:626-636.
13. Saez F., Urresola A., Larena J.A., et al. Endometrial carcinoma: assessment of myometrial invasion with plain and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000, 12:460-466.
14. Creasman W. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009, 105:109.
15. Manfredi R., Mirk P., Maresca G., et al. Local-regional staging of endometrial carcinoma: role of MR imaging in surgical planning. Radiology 2004, 231:372-378.
16. Chung H.H., Kang S.B., Cho J.Y., et al. Accuracy of MR imaging for the prediction of myometrial invasion of endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2007, 104:654-659.
17. Nakao Y., Yokoyama M., Hara K., et al. MR imaging in endometrial carcinoma as a diagnostic tool for the absence of myometrial invasion. Gynecol Oncol 2006, 102:343-347.
18. Félix A., Cunha T.M. Preoperative assessment of deep myometrial and cervical invasion in endometrial carcinoma: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and histopathologic evaluation. J Obstet Gynaecol 2007, 27:65-70.
19. Sala E., Crawford R., Senior E., et al. Added value of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in predicting advanced stage disease in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009, 19:141-146.
20. Utsunomiya D., Notsute S., Hayashida Y., et al. Endometrial carcinoma in adenomyosis: assessment of myometrial invasion on T2-weighted spin-echo and gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004, 182:399-404.
21. Frei K.A., Kinkel K., Bonl H.M., et al. Prediction of deep myometrial invasion in patients with endometrial cancer: clinical utility of contrast-enhanced MR imaging-a meta-analysis and Bayesian analysis. Radiology 2000, 216:444-449.
22. Shen S.H., Chiou Y.Y., Wang J.H., et al. Diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging with parallel technique in assessment of endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008, 190:481-488.
23. Tamai K., Koyama T., Saga T., et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of uterine endometrial cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007, 26:682-687.
24. Inada Y., Matsuki M., Nakai G., et al. Body diffusion-weighted MR imaging of uterine endometrial cancer: is it helpful in the detection of cancer in nonenhanced MR imaging?. Eur J Radiol 2009, 70:122-127.
25. Takeuchi M., Matsuzaki K., Nishitani H. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of endometrial cancer: differentiation from benign endometrial lesions and preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion. Acta Radiol 2009, 50:947-953.
26. Rechichi G., Galimberti S., Signorelli M., et al. Myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer: diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted MR imaging at 1.5-T. Eur Radiol 2010, 20:754-762.
27. Kinkel K., Kaji Y., Yu K.K., et al. Radiologic staging in patients with endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis. Radiology 1999, 212:711-718.
28. Ozdemir S., Celik C., Emlik D., et al. Assessment of myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer by transvaginal sonography, Doppler ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging and frozen section. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009, 19:1085-1090.
29. Alcázar J.L., Galván R., Albela S., et al. Assessing myometrial infiltration by endometrial cancer: uterine virtual navigation with three-dimensional US. Radiology 2009, 250:776-783.
30. Song Y., Yang J., Liu Z., et al. Preoperative evaluation of endometrial carcinoma by contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. BJOG 2009, 116:294-298. [discussion: 298-9].
31. Hardesty L.A., Sumkin J.H., Hakim C., et al. The ability of helical CT to preoperatively stage endometrial carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001, 176:603-606.
32. Tsili A.C., Tsampoulas C., Dalkalitsis N., et al. Local staging of endometrial carcinoma: role of multidetector CT. Eur Radiol 2008, 18:1043-1048.
33. Chi D.S., Barakat R.R., Palayekar M.J., et al. The incidence of pelvic lymph node metastasis by FIGO staging for patients with adequately surgically staged endometrial adenocarcinoma of endometrioid histology. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008, 18:269-273.
34. Celik C., Ozdemir S., Esen H., et al. The clinical value of preoperative and intraoperative assessments in the management of endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2010, 20:358-362.
35. Namimoto T., Awai K., Nakaura T., et al. Role of diffusion-weighted imaging in the diagnosis of gynecological diseases. Eur Radiol 2009, 19:745-760.
36. Lin G., Ng K.K., Chang C.J., et al. Myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer: diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted 3.0-T MR imaging-initial experience. Radiology 2009, 250:784-792.
37. Ozsarlak O., Tjalma W., Schepens E., et al. The correlation of preoperative CT, MR imaging, and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings in primary cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2003, 13:2338-2345.
38. Bipat S., Glas A.S., van der Velden J., et al. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 2003, 91:59-66.
39. Seki H., Azumi R., Kimura M., et al. Stromal invasion by carcinoma of the cervix: assessment by dynamic MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997, 168:1579-1585.
40. deSouza N.M., Dina R., McIndoe G.A., et al. Cervical cancer: value of an endovaginal coil magnetic resonance imaging technique in detecting small volume disease and assessing parametrial extension. Gynecol Oncol 2006, 102:80-85.
41. Hancke K., Heilmann V., Straka P., et al. Pretreatment staging of cervical cancer: is imaging better than palpation?: role of CT and MRI in preoperative staging of cervical cancer: single institution results for 255 patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2008, 15:2856-2861.
42. Choi S.H., Kim S.H., Choi H.J., et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: results of prospective study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004, 28:620-627.
43. Sahdev A., Sohaib S.A., Wenaden A.E., et al. The performance of magnetic resonance imaging in early cervical carcinoma: a long-term experience. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007, 17:629-636.
44. Manfredi R., Gui B., Giovanzana A., et al. Localized cervical cancer (stage
45. Hricak H., Gatsonis C., Chi D.S., 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, 23:9329-9337.
46. Mitchell D.G., Snyder B., Coakley F., et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol 2006, 24:5687-5694.
47. Mitchell D.G., Snyder B., Coakley F., et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: MRI and CT predictors of lymphatic metastases in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 intergroup study. Gynecol Oncol 2009, 112:95-103.
48. Hricak H., Gatsonis C., Coakley F.V., et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: CT and MR imaging in preoperative evaluation-ACRIN/GOG comparative study of diagnostic performance and interobserver variability. Radiology 2007, 245:491-498.
49. Abu-Rustum N.R., Sonoda Y., Black D., et al. Fertility-sparing radical abdominal trachelectomy for cervical carcinoma: technique and review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol 2006, 103:807-813.
50. Peppercorn P.D., Jeyarajah A.R., 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, 212:395-399.
51. Bipat S., van den Berg R.A., van der Velden J., et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in determining the proximal extension of early stage cervical cancer to the internal os. Eur J Radiol 2009, [Epub ahead of print].
52. Lee D.W., Kim Y.T., Kim J.H., et al. Clinical significance of tumor volume and lymph node involvement assessed by MRI in stage IIB cervical cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiation therapy. J Gynecol Oncol 2010, 21:18-23.
53. Tofts P.S., Brix G., Buckley D.L., et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusible tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 10:223-232.
54. Yuh W.T., Mayr N.A., Jarjoura D., et al. Predicting control of primary tumor and survival by DCE MRI during early therapy in cervical cancer. Invest Radiol 2009, 44:343-350.
55. Mayr N.A., Wang J.Z., Zhang D., et al. Longitudinal changes in tumor perfusion pattern during the radiation therapy course and its clinical impact in cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 77:502-508.
56. Zahra M.A., Tan L.T., Priest A.N., et al. Semiquantitative and quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging measurements predict radiation response in cervix cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 74:766-773.
57. Semple S.I., Harry V.N., Parkin D.E., et al. A combined pharmacokinetic and radiologic assessment of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging predicts response to chemoradiation in locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009, 75:611-617.
58. Donaldson S.B., Buckley D.L., O'Connor J.P. Enhancing fraction measured using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI predicts disease-free survival in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. Br J Cancer 2010, 102:23-26.
59. Messiou C., Morgan V.A., De Silva S.S., et al. Diffusion weighted imaging of the uterus: regional ADC variation with oral contraceptive usage and comparison with cervical cancer. Acta Radiol 2009, 50:696-701.
60. Liu Y., Bai R., Sun H., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging in predicting and monitoring the response of uterine cervical cancer to combined chemoradiation. Clin Radiol 2009, 64:1067-1074.
61. Payne G.S., Schmidt M., Morgan V.A., et al. Evaluation of magnetic resonance diffusion and spectroscopy measurements as predictive biomarkers in stage 1 cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2010, 116(2):246-252.
62. Park J.M., Charnsangavej C., Yoshimitsu K., et al. Pathways of nodal metastasis from pelvic tumors: CT demonstration. Radiographics 1994, 14(6):1309-1321.
63. Yang W.T., Man Lam W.W., Yu M.Y., et al. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000, 175:759-766.
64. Choi H.J., Ju W., Myung S.K., et al. Diagnostic performance of computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: meta-analysis. Cancer Sci 2010, 101:1471-1479.
65. Lin G., Ho K.C., Wang J.J., et al. Detection of lymph node metastasis in cervical and uterine cancers by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008, 28:128-135.
66. Sala E., Wakely S., Senior E., et al. MRI of malignant neoplasms of the uterine corpus and cervix. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007, 188:1577-1587.
67. Rieber A., Nussle K., Stohr I., et al. Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors with MR imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings AJR. Am J Roentgenol 2001, 177:123-129.
68. AJCC cancer staging handbook 2010, Springer, New York. 7th edition. S.B. Edge, D.R. Byrd, C.C. Compton (Eds.).
69. Iyer V.R., Lee S.I. MRI, CT and PET/CT for ovarian cancer detection and adnexal lesion characterization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 194:311-321.
70. Mironov S., Akin O., Pandit-Taskar N., et al. Ovarian cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2007, 45:149-166.
71. Zhang J., Mironov S., Hricak H., et al. Characterization of adnexal masses using feature analysis at contrast-enhanced helical computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2008, 32:533-540.
72. Brown D.L., Dudiak K.M., Laing F.C. Adnexal masses: US characterization and reporting. Radiology 2010, 254:342-354.
73. Shaaban A., Rezvani M. Ovarian cancer: detection and radiologic staging. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2009, 52:73-93.
74. Kinkel K., Hricak H., Lu Ying, et al. US characterization of ovarian masses: a meta-analysis. Radiology 2000, 217:803-811.
75. Kurtz A.B., Tsimikas J.V., Tempany C.M., et al. Diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer: comparative values of Doppler and conventional US, CT, and MR imaging correlated with surgery and histopathologic analysis-report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 1999, 212:19-27.
76. Spencer J.A., Forstner R., Cunha T.M., et al. ESUR Female Imaging Sub-Committee. ESUR guidelines for MR imaging of the sonographically indeterminate adnexal mass: an algorithmic approach. Eur Radiol 2010, 20:25-35.
77. Kinkel K., Lu Y., Mehdizade A., et al. Indeterminate ovarian mass at US: incremental value of second imaging test for characterization-meta-analysis and Bayesian analysis. Radiology 2005, 236:85-94.
78. Ordén M.R., Jurvelin J.S., Kirkinen P.P. Kinetics of a US contrast agent in benign and malignant adnexal tumors. Radiology 2003, 226:405-410.
79. Marret H., Sauget S., Giraudeau B., et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography helps in discrimination of benign from malignant adnexal masses. J Ultrasound Med 2004, 23:1629-1639.
80. Fleischer A.C., Lyshchik A., Jones H.W., et al. Diagnostic parameters to differentiate benign from malignant ovarian masses with contrast-enhanced transvaginal sonography. J Ultrasound Med 2009, 28:1273-1780.
81. Thomassin-Naggara I., Bazot M., Daraï E., et al. Epithelial ovarian tumors: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 2008, 248:148-159.
82. Sala E., Priest A.N., Kataoka M., et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient and vascular signal fraction measurements with magnetic resonance imaging: feasibility in metastatic ovarian cancer at 3 Tesla: technical development. Eur Radiol 2010, 20:491-496.
83. Coakley F.V., Hricak H. Imaging of peritoneal and mesenteric disease: key concepts for the clinical radiologist. Clin Radiol 1999, 54:563-574.
84. Tempany C.M.C., Zou K.H., Silverman S.G., et al. Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities-report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 2000, 215:761-767.
85. Forstner R., Hricak H., Occhipinti K.A., et al. Ovarian cancer: staging with CT and MR imaging. Radiology 1995, 197:619-626.
86. Ricke J., Sehouli J., Hach C., et al. Prospective evaluation of contrast-enhanced MRI in the depiction of peritoneal spread in primary or recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur Radiol 2003, 13:943-949.
87. Akin O., Sala E., Moskowitz C.S., et al. Perihepatic metastases from ovarian cancer: sensitivity and specificity of CT for the detection of metastases with and those without liver parenchymal invasion. Radiology 2008, 248:511-517.
88. Funt S.A., Hricak H., Abu-Rustum N., et al. Role of CT in the management of recurrent ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004, 182:393-398.
89. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009, 105:103-104.
90. Coakley F.V., Choi P.H., Gougoutas C.A., et al. Peritoneal metastases: detection with spiral CT in patients with ovarian cancer. Radiology 2002, 223:495-499.
91. Pannu H.K., Horton K.M., Fishman E.K. Thin section dual-phase multidetector-row computed tomography detection of peritoneal metastases in gynecologic cancers. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2003, 27:333-340.
92. Nam E.J., Yun M.J., Oh Y.T., et al. Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI. Gynecol Oncol 2010, 116:389-394.
93. Low R.N., Sebrechts C.P., Barone R.M., et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI of peritoneal tumors: comparison with conventional MRI and surgical and histopathologic findings-a feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009, 193:461-470.
94. Qayyum A., Coakley F.V., Westphalen A.C., et al. Role of CT and MR imaging in predicting optimal cytoreduction of newly diagnosed primary epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2005, 96:301-306.
95. Park C.M., Kim S.H., Kim S.H., et al. Recurrent ovarian malignancy: patterns and spectrum of imaging findings. Abdom Imaging 2003, 28:404-415.
96. Sahdev A., Hughes J.H., Barwick T., et al. Computed tomography features of recurrent ovarian carcinoma according to time to relapse. Acta Radiol 2007, 48:1038-1044.