Utility of magnetic resonance in preoperative staging of endometrial cancer
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18004/Keywords:
Endometrial cancer, Staging, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, ParaguayAbstract
Objective: Evaluate the usefulness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in order to assess myometrial and cervical tumor infiltration in endometrial carcinoma. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of 26 patient’s MRI studies with histological confirmation of endometrial cancer was conducted (diagnosis by endometrial cancer biopsy). Pre-surgical staging and correlation with the histological staging of the operative piece was performed. Concordance, sensitivity (S), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the method for the deepening of the tumor in the myometrial thickness and the invasion of the cervix were studied. The possible causes of overestimation and underestimation were analyzed. Results: MRI evaluation for the myometrial infiltration by stage and cervix invasion generated these results: S of 72.2%, 75%, 66.7%, SP of 75%, 72.2%, 95.7%, PPV of 86.7%, 54.5%, 66.7%, NPV of 54.5%, 86.7%, 95.7% (for stages IA, IB and II respectively). Five cases were overestimated for myometrial infiltration and 1 for the cervix; 2 cases were underestimated for myometrial infiltration and 1 case for the cervix. A moderate concordance was found for stage I and a good concordance for stage II. Conclusion: MRI is a useful tool for pre-surgical staging of endometrial carcinoma with a moderate to good reliability, which added to the type and histological grade, helps to determine the most appropriate therapeutic strategy.
References
1. Shepherd J H. Revised FIGO staging for gynaecological cancer. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 96:889-92.
2. Freeman SJ, Aly AM, Kataoka MY, Addley HC, Reinhold C, Sala E. The revised FIGO system for uterine malignancies: implications for MR imaging. Radiographics 2012; 32(6):1805-27.
3. Consenso Nacional Inter-Sociedades sobre Cáncer de Endometrio. Programa Argentino de Consensos de Enfermedades Oncològicas. Junio 2016. http://www.socargcancer.org.ar/consensos.php.
4. Sala E, Wakely S, Senior E, Lomas D. MRI of malignant neoplasms of the uterine corpus and cervix. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188(6):1577–158
5. Frei KA, Kinkel K. Staging endometrial cancer: role of magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13(6):850–855.
6. Sironi S, Colombo E, Villa G, et al. Myometrial invasión by endometrial carcinoma: assessment with plain and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1992; 185(1):207–212.
7. Rechichi G, Galimberti S, Signorelli M, Franzesi CT, Perego P, Valsechi MG, Sironi S. Endometrial cáncer: correlatiosn of apparent diffusion coefficient with tumor grade, depth of myometrial ivasion, and presence of lymph node metastases. AJR Am Roetgenol. 2011; 197(1):256-62
8. Nicolet V, Carignan L, Bourdon F, Prosmanne O. MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach. RadioGraphics 2000; 20:1539–1549
9. Kaur H, Silverman PM, Iyer RB, Verschraegen CF, Eifel PJ, Charnsangavej C. Diagnosis, staging, and surveillance of cervical carcinoma. AJR 2003; 180:1621–1631
10. Sahdev A, Sohaib SA, Jacobs I, Shepherd JH, Oram DH, Reznek RH. MR imaging of uterine sarcomas. AJR 2001; 177:1307–1311
11. Rockall AG, Meroni R, Sohaib SA, et al. Evaluation of endometrial carcinoma on magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007; 17(1):188–196.
12. Larson DM, Connor GP, Broste SK, Krawisz BR, Johnson KK. Prognostic significance of gross myometrial invasion with endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88(3):394–398.
13. Kinkel K, Forstner R, Danza FM, et al. Staging of endometrial cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Imaging. Eur Radiol 2009; 19(7):1565–1574.
14. Querleu D, Planchamp F, Narducci F, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial cancer in France: recommendations of the Institut National du Cancer and the Société Française d’Oncologie Gynécologique. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2011; 21(5):945–950.
15. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines): uterine neoplasms. Version 3. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guide lines.asp. Published March 20, 2012. Accessed April 1, 2012.
16. Sala E, Wakely S, Senior E, Lomas D. MRI of malignant neoplasms of the uterine corpus and cérvix. AJR Am Roetgenol.2007; 188(6):1577-87.
17. Kim SH, Kim HD, Song YS, Kang SB, Lee HP. Detection of deep myometrial invasion in endometrial carcinoma: comparison of transvaginal ultrasound, CT, and MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1995; 19:766–772.
18. Kinkel K, Kaji Y, Yu KK, et al. Radiologic staging in patients with endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis.
19. Radiology 1999; 212:711–718 32. Hricak H, Stern JL, Fisher MR, Shapeero LG, Winkler
20. ML, Lacey CG. Endometrial carcinoma staging by MR imaging. Radiology 1987; 162:297–305
21. Hricak H, Rubinstein LV, Gherman GM, Karstaedt N. MR imaging evaluation of endometrial carcinoma:results of an NCI cooperative study. Radiology 1991; 179:829–832
22. 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
23. Sironi S, Colombo E, Villa G, et al. Myometrial invasión by endometrial carcinoma: ssessment with plain and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1992; 185:207–212
24. Seki H, Takano T, Sakai K. Value of dynamic MR imaging in assessing endometrial carcinoma involvement of the cervix. AJR 2000; 175:171–176
25. Shepherd JH. Revised FIGO staging for gynaecological cancer. BrJ Obstet Gynecol 1989; 96:889-92
26. Han J, Chang C, Endometrial cancer. Radiation Oncology.
27. http:/www.xrt.upenn.edu/training/endometrial.htm
28. Rauch GM, Kaur H, Chol H, Ernst RD, Klopp AH, Boonsirikamchai P, Westin SN, Marcal MP. Optomization of MR imaging for pretreatment evaluation of patients with endometrial and cervical cáncer. Radiographics 2014; 34(4):1082.
