A STUDY ON ROLE OF MRI IN STAGING OF CARCINOMA CERVIX AND CORRELATION WITH CLINICAL STAGING(FIGO)
Main Article Content
Keywords
.
Abstract
According to the results of India Cancer incidence estimates for 2022 according to National Cancer Registry Programme published by Indian J Med Res. 2022 Oct-Nov, cervical cancer ranks as the second most common cancer among females affecting approximately 123907 individuals which account for 18.3% of all female cancer patients(1).
Treatment options for cervical cancer depend on the stage, classified according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) system(2). For early-stage disease (FIGO stage IA, IB1, and IIA), radical surgery, including trachelectomy or radical hysterectomy, is the preferred choice. Conversely, primary radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy is recommended for patients with bulky tumors (FIGO stage IB2/IIA2) or locally advanced disease (FIGO stage IIB or greater).
References
1. Krishnan Sathish Kumar, Meesha Chaturvedi, Priyanka Das, S. Stephen, and Prashant Mathur. Cancer incidence estimates for 2022 & projection for 2025: Result from National Cancer Registry Programme, India. Indian J Med Res. 2022 Oct-Nov; 156(4-5): 598–607.
2. Valentini AL, Gui B, Micco M, Giuliani M, Rodolfino E, Ninivaggi V, et al. MRI anatomy of parametrial extension to better identify local pathways of disease spread in cervical cancer. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2016;22(4):319–325. doi:10.5152/dir.2015.15282
3. Lee SI, Atri M. 2018 FIGO staging system for uterine cervical cancer: enter cross-sectional imaging. Radiology. 2019;292(1):15–24. doi:10.1148/radiol.2019190088
4. Dhoot NM, Kumar V, Shinagare A, Kataki AC, Barmon D, Bhuyan U. Evaluation of carcinoma cervix using magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with clinical FIGO staging and impact on management. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2012;56(1):58–65. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02333.x
5. Nicolet V, Carignan L, Bourdon F, Prosmanne O. MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach. Radiographics. 2000;20(6):1539–1549. doi:10.1148/radiographics.20.6.g00nv111539
6. Ho CM, Chien TY, Jeng CM, Tsang YM, Shih BY, Chang SC. Staging of cervical cancer: comparison between magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and pelvic examination under anesthesia. J Formos Med Assoc. 1992;91(10):982–990.
7. Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, Reinhold C, Thomas G, Amendola M, 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(36):5687–5694. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.07.4799
8. Ozsarlak O, Tjalma W, Schepens E, Corthouts B, Beeck OB, Van ME, et al. The correlation of preoperative CT, MR imaging, and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings in primary cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(10):2338–2345. doi:10.1007/s00330-003-1928-2
9. Shirazi AS, Razi T, Cheraghi F, Rahim F, Ehsani S, Davoodi M. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging versus clinical staging in cervical cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(14):5729–5732. doi:10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.14.5729
10. Balcacer P, Shergill A, Litkouhi B. MRI of cervical cancer with a surgical perspective: staging, prognostic implications and pitfalls. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019;44(7):2557–2571. doi:10.1007/s00261-019-01984-7
11. Thomeer MG, Gerestein C, Spronk S, Doorn HC, Ham E, Hunink MG. Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(7):2005–2018. doi:10.1007/s00330-013-2783-4
12. Chung H, Ahn HS, Kim YS, Lee EJ, Ryu HS, Chang KH, et al. The value of cystoscopy and intravenous urography after magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography in the staging of cervical carcinoma. Yonsei Med J. 2001;42(5):527–531. doi:10.3349/ymj.2001.42.5.527
13. Haldorsen IS, Lura N, Blaakaer J, Fischerova D, Werner HMJ. What is the role of imaging at primary diagnostic work-up in uterine cervical cancer? Curr Oncol Rep. 2019;21(9):77. doi:10.1007/s11912-019-0824-0
14. Rockall AG, Ghosh S, Alexander-Sefre F, Babar S, Younis MT, Naz S, et al. Can MRI rule out bladder and rectal invasion in cervical cancer to help select patients for limited EUA? Gynecol Oncol. 2006;101(2):244–249. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.
15. Shaw’s Textbook of Gynaecology, 16th Edition VG Padubidri, SN Daftary 2015 Reprint 2016
16. Berek & Novak’s Gynecology, South Asian Edition, Jonathan S Berek, AG Radhika, Rashmi Malik - 2022
2. Valentini AL, Gui B, Micco M, Giuliani M, Rodolfino E, Ninivaggi V, et al. MRI anatomy of parametrial extension to better identify local pathways of disease spread in cervical cancer. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2016;22(4):319–325. doi:10.5152/dir.2015.15282
3. Lee SI, Atri M. 2018 FIGO staging system for uterine cervical cancer: enter cross-sectional imaging. Radiology. 2019;292(1):15–24. doi:10.1148/radiol.2019190088
4. Dhoot NM, Kumar V, Shinagare A, Kataki AC, Barmon D, Bhuyan U. Evaluation of carcinoma cervix using magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with clinical FIGO staging and impact on management. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2012;56(1):58–65. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02333.x
5. Nicolet V, Carignan L, Bourdon F, Prosmanne O. MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach. Radiographics. 2000;20(6):1539–1549. doi:10.1148/radiographics.20.6.g00nv111539
6. Ho CM, Chien TY, Jeng CM, Tsang YM, Shih BY, Chang SC. Staging of cervical cancer: comparison between magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and pelvic examination under anesthesia. J Formos Med Assoc. 1992;91(10):982–990.
7. Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, Reinhold C, Thomas G, Amendola M, 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(36):5687–5694. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.07.4799
8. Ozsarlak O, Tjalma W, Schepens E, Corthouts B, Beeck OB, Van ME, et al. The correlation of preoperative CT, MR imaging, and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings in primary cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(10):2338–2345. doi:10.1007/s00330-003-1928-2
9. Shirazi AS, Razi T, Cheraghi F, Rahim F, Ehsani S, Davoodi M. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging versus clinical staging in cervical cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(14):5729–5732. doi:10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.14.5729
10. Balcacer P, Shergill A, Litkouhi B. MRI of cervical cancer with a surgical perspective: staging, prognostic implications and pitfalls. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019;44(7):2557–2571. doi:10.1007/s00261-019-01984-7
11. Thomeer MG, Gerestein C, Spronk S, Doorn HC, Ham E, Hunink MG. Clinical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging in the pretreatment staging of cervical carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(7):2005–2018. doi:10.1007/s00330-013-2783-4
12. Chung H, Ahn HS, Kim YS, Lee EJ, Ryu HS, Chang KH, et al. The value of cystoscopy and intravenous urography after magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography in the staging of cervical carcinoma. Yonsei Med J. 2001;42(5):527–531. doi:10.3349/ymj.2001.42.5.527
13. Haldorsen IS, Lura N, Blaakaer J, Fischerova D, Werner HMJ. What is the role of imaging at primary diagnostic work-up in uterine cervical cancer? Curr Oncol Rep. 2019;21(9):77. doi:10.1007/s11912-019-0824-0
14. Rockall AG, Ghosh S, Alexander-Sefre F, Babar S, Younis MT, Naz S, et al. Can MRI rule out bladder and rectal invasion in cervical cancer to help select patients for limited EUA? Gynecol Oncol. 2006;101(2):244–249. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.
15. Shaw’s Textbook of Gynaecology, 16th Edition VG Padubidri, SN Daftary 2015 Reprint 2016
16. Berek & Novak’s Gynecology, South Asian Edition, Jonathan S Berek, AG Radhika, Rashmi Malik - 2022
Article Sidebar
Published
Aug 22, 2023
Article Details
How to Cite
Mutyam Satyakala, Chagalamarri Amulya, Polumuru Usha Devi, & Abhinav Chintala. (2023). A STUDY ON ROLE OF MRI IN STAGING OF CARCINOMA CERVIX AND CORRELATION WITH CLINICAL STAGING(FIGO). Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, 30(10), 597-602. https://doi.org/10.53555/jptcp.v30i10.6414
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Author Biographies
Mutyam Satyakala
Postgraduate, Dept of OB&G, KGH/AMC, Visakhapatnam,
Chagalamarri Amulya
Professor Dept. of OB&G, KGH/AMC, Visakhapatnam
Polumuru Usha Devi
Associate Professor, Dept. of OB&G, KGH/AMC, Visakhapatnam,
Abhinav Chintala
House Surgeon, KGH/AMC, Visakhapatnam,
How to Cite
Mutyam Satyakala, Chagalamarri Amulya, Polumuru Usha Devi, & Abhinav Chintala. (2023). A STUDY ON ROLE OF MRI IN STAGING OF CARCINOMA CERVIX AND CORRELATION WITH CLINICAL STAGING(FIGO). Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, 30(10), 597-602. https://doi.org/10.53555/jptcp.v30i10.6414
