Transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of early cervical cancer
Language English Country England, Great Britain Media print-electronic
Document type Evaluation Study, Journal Article
PubMed
17892456
DOI
10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.01072.x
PII: IJG1072
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Early Diagnosis MeSH
- Endosonography MeSH
- Carcinoma diagnostic imaging pathology MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging methods MeSH
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms diagnostic imaging pathology MeSH
- Predictive Value of Tests MeSH
- Rectum diagnostic imaging MeSH
- Radiography MeSH
- Sensitivity and Specificity MeSH
- Neoplasm Staging MeSH
- Tumor Burden MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Evaluation Study MeSH
The goal of this study was to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) in comparison to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of tumor volume, early parametrial infiltration, and identification of residual tumor in early-stage cervical cancer. Patients in whom an early-stage cervical cancer was diagnosed by clinical examination were enrolled in the study. Only those patients who were examined by both MRI and TRUS with following surgical treatment were included. Imaging results were compared with pathology findings. Altogether, 120 patients were consecutively enrolled from January 2004 to February 2006. Data from 95 patients were evaluated. Correlation coefficient for TRUS- and MRI-derived volumes versus volumes at pathology reached R = 0.996 and R = 0.980, respectively. The accuracy for detecting tumor in 95 patients was 93.7% for TRUS and 83.2% for MRI (P
References provided by Crossref.org
The Role of Imaging in Cervical Cancer Staging: ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines (Update 2023)
What Is the Role of Imaging at Primary Diagnostic Work-Up in Uterine Cervical Cancer?
Ultrasound in gynecological cancer: is it time for re-evaluation of its uses?
