Can MRI rule out bladder and rectal invasion in cervical cancer to help select patients for limited EUA?

被引:72
作者
Rockall, A. G.
Ghosh, S.
Alexander-Sefre, F.
Babar, S.
Younis, M. T. S.
Naz, S.
Jacobs, I. J.
Reznek, R. H.
机构
[1] St Bartholomews Hosp, Dept Radiol, London EC1A 7ED, England
[2] St Bartholomews Hosp, Dept Gynaecol Oncol, London, England
关键词
cervical cancer; FIGO staging; MRI; bladder invasion; rectal invasion;
D O I
10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.10.012
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objectives. Although invasion of the bladder or rectum is rare in cervical carcinoma, endoscopic assessment of both organs is part of the standard FIGO clinical staging system, with associated increase in cost and risk of complications. Our objective was to evaluate whether MRI could be used to select patients who did not require invasive staging of the bladder or rectum. Methods. Two observers, blinded to the results of cystoscopy and endoscopic examination of the rectum, retrospectively reviewed the MR images of If 2 patients with cervical carcinoma. A 5-point invasion score was used to determine bladder and rectal invasion (1 = no invasion, 5 = definite invasion). A confidence score of 3 or above was used to identify patients with possible bladder or rectal involvement. The results of cystoscopy and endoscopic examination of the rectum were recorded and correlated with the MR findings. Results. MRI was negative for both bladder and rectal invasion in 94/112 patients. Cystoscopy and endoscopic examination of the rectum were confirmed to be normal in all 94 cases. MRI identified 12 patients with possible rectal invasion, 2 confirmed at endoscopy. MRI identified 14 patients with possible bladder invasion, one confirmed at cystoscopy. Using a low threshold cut-off score of > 3 to predict invasion resulted in a 100% negative predictive value (NPV) in detection of bladder and rectal invasion. Conclusion. The absence of bladder or rectal invasion can be diagnosed with sufficient confidence using an MRI scoring system to safely obviate the need for invasive cystoscopic or endoscopic staging in the majority of patients with cervical cancer. This could potentially lead to a reduction in staging costs and morbidity. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:244 / 249
页数:6
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Single flexible sigmoidoscopy screening to prevent colorectal cancer: baseline findings of a UK multicentre randomised trial
    Atkin, WS
    Cook, CF
    Cuzick, J
    Edwards, R
    Northover, JMA
    Wardle, J
    [J]. LANCET, 2002, 359 (9314) : 1291 - 1300
  • [2] AVERETTE H E, 1975, Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology, V18, P215, DOI 10.1097/00003081-197509000-00023
  • [3] Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: a systematic review
    Bipat, S
    Glas, AS
    van der Velden, J
    Zwinderman, AH
    Bossuyt, PMM
    Stoker, J
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2003, 91 (01) : 59 - 66
  • [4] MAGNETIC-RESONANCE IMAGING IN CERVICAL-CANCER - A BASIS FOR OBJECTIVE CLASSIFICATION
    BURGHARDT, E
    HOFMANN, HMW
    EBNER, F
    HAAS, J
    TAMUSSINO, K
    JUSTICH, E
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 1989, 33 (01) : 61 - 67
  • [5] The community-based morbidity of flexible cystoscopy
    Burke, DM
    Shackley, DC
    O'Reilly, PH
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2002, 89 (04) : 347 - 349
  • [6] *CANC RES UK, 2004, CANC STAT MON
  • [7] The value of cystoscopy and intravenous urography after magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography in the staging of cervical carcinoma
    Chung, H
    Ahn, HS
    Kim, YS
    Lee, EJ
    Ryu, HS
    Chang, KH
    Kim, SJ
    [J]. YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 42 (05) : 527 - 531
  • [8] EIFEL PJ, 2001, CANC PRINCIPLES PRAC, P1526
  • [9] EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES USED IN STAGING CARCINOMA OF CERVIX
    GRIFFIN, TW
    PARKER, RG
    TAYLOR, WJ
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1976, 127 (05) : 825 - 827
  • [10] Cervical carcinoma: Comparison of standard and pharmacokinetic MR imaging
    Hawighorst, H
    Knapstein, PG
    Weikel, W
    Knopp, MV
    Schaeffer, U
    Brix, G
    Essig, M
    Hoffmann, U
    Zuna, I
    Schonberg, S
    vanKaick, G
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1996, 201 (02) : 531 - 539