Parametrial Invasion in Cervical Cancer: Fused T2-weighted Imaging and High-b-Value Diffusion-weighted Imaging with Background Body Signal Suppression at 3 T

被引:67
作者
Park, Jung Jae
Kim, Chan Kyo [1 ]
Park, Sung Yoon
Park, Byung Kwan
机构
[1] Sungkyunkwan Univ, Samsung Med Ctr, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Seoul 135710, South Korea
关键词
UTERINE CERVIX; CARCINOMA; ONCOLOGY; CHEMOTHERAPY; RADIOTHERAPY; METAANALYSIS; TESTS; MRI; CT;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.14140920
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To retrospectively investigate the value of fused T2-weighted and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS) at 3 T to evaluate parametrial invasion in cervical cancer. Materials and Methods: In this institutional review board-approved study, 152 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomies also underwent pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging (T2-weighted imaging and DWIBS) at 3 T. Two radiologists independently evaluated the presence of parametrial invasion at T2-weighted imaging, fused T2-weighted imaging and high-b-value DWIBS (ie, fused T2-weighted DWIBS), and combined T2-weighted imaging and fused T2-weighted DWIBS, and the results were compared with histopathologic findings. Results: Parametrial invasion was identified by pathologic analysis in 37 of 152 patients (24.3%). For association with parametrial invasion, the specificity and accuracy of fused T2-weighted DWIBS (97.4% and 90.1%, respectively, for reader 1; 95.7% and 89.5%, respectively, for reader 2) and combined T2-weighted imaging and fused T2-weighted DWIBS (99.1% and 93.4%, respectively, for reader 1; 96.5% and 92.8%, respectively, for reader 2) were significantly better than those of T2-weighted imaging alone (88.7% and 85.5%, respectively, for reader 1; 85.2% and 83.6%, respectively, for reader 2) (all P < .05). The respective sensitivity of T2-weighted imaging, fused T2-weighted DWIBS, and combined T2-weighted imaging and fused T2-weighted DWIBS was 75.7%, 67.6%, and 75.7% for reader 1 and 78.4%, 70.3%, and 81.1% for reader 2, and did not show significant differences (P value, <=.375 to >.999). The respective area under the curve for association with parametrial invasion of T2-weighted imaging, fused T2-weighted DWIBS, and combined T2-weighted imaging and fused T2-weighted DWIBS was 0.912, 0.951, and 0.976 for reader 1 and 0.890, 0.932, and 0.968 for reader 2 (P < .05). Interreader agreements were excellent (kappa = 0.89, 0.9, and 0.86 for T2-weighted imaging, fused T2-weighted DWIBS, and combined T2-weighted imaging and fused T2-weighted DWIBS, respectively). Conclusion: Fusion of high-b-value DWIBS with T2-weighted imaging can improve the diagnostic performance in association with parametrial invasion in cervical cancer compared with T2-weighted imaging alone. (C) RSNA, 2014
引用
收藏
页码:734 / 741
页数:8
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   MULTIPLE SIGNIFICANCE TESTS - THE BONFERRONI METHOD .10. [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1995, 310 (6973) :170-170
[2]   Diffusion-weighted Imaging in Cervical Cancer with an Endovaginal Technique: Potential Value for Improving Tumor Detection in Stage Ia and Ib1 Disease [J].
Charles-Edwards, Elizabeth M. ;
Messiou, Christina ;
Morgan, Veronica A. ;
De Silva, Sonali S. ;
McWhinney, Norman A. ;
Katesmark, Mike ;
Attygalle, Ayoma D. ;
deSouza, Nandita M. .
RADIOLOGY, 2008, 249 (02) :541-550
[3]   A PROSPECTIVE SURGICAL PATHOLOGICAL-STUDY OF STAGE 1 SQUAMOUS CARCINOMA OF THE CERVIX - A GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP-STUDY [J].
DELGADO, G ;
BUNDY, BN ;
FOWLER, WC ;
STEHMAN, FB ;
SEVIN, B ;
CREASMAN, WT ;
MAJOR, F ;
DISAIA, P ;
ZAINO, R .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 1989, 35 (03) :314-320
[4]   The Revised FIGO Staging System for Uterine Malignancies: Implications for MR Imaging [J].
Freeman, Susan J. ;
Aly, Ahmed M. ;
Kataoka, Masako Y. ;
Addley, Helen C. ;
Reinhold, Caroline ;
Sala, Evis .
RADIOGRAPHICS, 2012, 32 (06) :1805-1827
[5]   Survival and recurrence after concomitant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer of the uterine cervix: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Green, JA ;
Kirwan, JM ;
Tierney, JF ;
Symonds, P ;
Fresco, L ;
Collingwood, M ;
Williams, CJ .
LANCET, 2001, 358 (9284) :781-786
[6]   Novel imaging techniques as response biomarkers in cervical cancer [J].
Harry, Vanessa N. .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2010, 116 (02) :253-261
[7]   Cervical carcinoma: Comparison of standard and pharmacokinetic MR imaging [J].
Hawighorst, H ;
Knapstein, PG ;
Weikel, W ;
Knopp, MV ;
Schaeffer, U ;
Brix, G ;
Essig, M ;
Hoffmann, U ;
Zuna, I ;
Schonberg, S ;
vanKaick, G .
RADIOLOGY, 1996, 201 (02) :531-539
[8]   INVASIVE CERVICAL-CARCINOMA - COMPARISON OF MR IMAGING AND SURGICAL FINDINGS [J].
HRICAK, H ;
LACEY, CG ;
SANDLES, LG ;
CHANG, YCF ;
WINKLER, ML ;
STERN, JL .
RADIOLOGY, 1988, 166 (03) :623-631
[9]   Imaging in oncology from the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center [J].
Kaur, H ;
Silverman, PM ;
Iyer, RB ;
Verschraegen, CF ;
Eifel, PJ ;
Charnsangavej, C .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2003, 180 (06) :1621-1632
[10]   Evaluation of therapeutic response to concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer using diffusion-weighted MR imaging [J].
Kim, Hyun Su ;
Kim, Chan Kyo ;
Park, Byung Kwan ;
Huh, Seung Jae ;
Kim, Bohyun .
JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2013, 37 (01) :187-193