American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 171, 707-711, Copyright © 1998 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma: phased array coil fast spin- echo versus body coil spin-echo T2-weighted MR imaging

KK Yu, H Hricak, LL Subak, CJ Zaloudek and CB Powell
Department of Radiology, UCSF-Mount Zion Cancer Center, University of California San Francisco, School of Medicine, 94143-0628, USA.

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to compare the diagnostic efficacy of MR imaging in the preoperative evaluation of invasive cervical cancer using the pelvic phased array coil in combination with fast spin- echo T2-weighted imaging and the body coil in combination with conventional spin-echo T2-weighted imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-four women (22-68 years old) with invasive cervical cancer underwent MR imaging (at 1.5 T) using a body coil conventional spin- echo protocol (n = 62) or a phased array coil fast spin-echo protocol (n = 32). Imaging preceded surgery by no more than 5 weeks. MR images were evaluated for tumor size, local stage, and nodal metastasis using surgical pathology as the standard of reference. RESULTS: Overall staging accuracy for the body coil conventional spin-echo protocol (89%) was not significantly different from that of the phased array coil fast spin-echo protocol (91%). Both techniques also achieved similar accuracy in diagnosing parametrial invasion (95% versus 94%) and lymph node metastases (85% versus 91%) and in tumor sizing (correlation coefficient, .93 versus .94). CONCLUSION: In the preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma by MR imaging, both the newer (phased array coil fast spin-echo protocol) and the older (body coil conventional spin-echo protocol) techniques achieved similarly high accuracies in local staging, assessment of parametrial invasion, and evaluation of tumor size. Decreased imaging time and increased image resolution are advantages of the newer technique, although in our series they did not increase staging accuracy.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. J. Selman, C. Mann MD, J. Zamora PhD, T.-L. Appleyard MBBS, and K. Khan MSc Diagnostic accuracy of tests for lymph node status in primary cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 25, 2008; 178(7): 855 - 862. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Sala, S. Wakely, E. Senior, and D. Lomas MRI of Malignant Neoplasms of the Uterine Corpus and Cervix Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2007; 188(6): 1577 - 1587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. J. Choi, S. H. Kim, S.-S. Seo, S. Kang, S. Lee, J.-Y. Kim, Y. H. Kim, J. S. Lee, H. H. Chung, J.-H. Lee, et al. MRI for pretreatment lymph node staging in uterine cervical cancer. Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2006; 187(5): W538 - W543. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. G. Rockall, S. A. Sohaib, M. G. Harisinghani, S. A. Babar, N. Singh, A. R. Jeyarajah, D. H. Oram, I. J. Jacobs, J. H. Shepherd, and R. H. Reznek Diagnostic Performance of Nanoparticle-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lymph Node Metastases in Patients With Endometrial and Cervical Cancer J. Clin. Oncol., April 20, 2005; 23(12): 2813 - 2821. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Nicolet, L. Carignan, F. Bourdon, and O. Prosmanne MR Imaging of Cervical Carcinoma: A Practical Staging Approach RadioGraphics, November 1, 2000; 20(6): 1539 - 1549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. T. Yang, W. W. M. Lam, M. Y. Yu, T. H. Cheung, and C. Metreweli Comparison of Dynamic Helical CT and Dynamic MR Imaging in the Evaluation of Pelvic Lymph Nodes in Cervical Carcinoma Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2000; 175(3): 759 - 766. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]