AJR InPractice
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Williams, A. D.
Right arrow Articles by deSouza, N. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Williams, A. D.
Right arrow Articles by deSouza, N. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
AJR 2001; 177:343-348
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Detection of Pelvic Lymph Node Metastases in Gynecologic Malignancy

A Comparison of CT, MR Imaging, and Positron Emission Tomography

A. D. Williams1, C. Cousins1, W. P. Soutter2, M. Mubashar1, A. M. Peters1, R. Dina3, F. Fuchsel1, G. A. McIndoe2 and N. M. deSouza1

1 Department of Imaging, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College School of Medicine, Du Cane Rd., London W12 0HS, United Kingdom.
2 Department of Gynecological Oncology, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College School of Medicine, London W12 0HS, United Kingdom.
3 Department of Histopathology, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College School of Medicine, London W12 0HS, United Kingdom.

Received November 27, 2000; accepted after revision February 2, 2001.

 
Presented at the annual meeting of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Denver, April 2000.

Address correspondence to A. D. Williams.


Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
OBJECTIVE. Accurate assessment of lymph node status before treatment is critical in the treatment of gynecologic cancers because the 5-year survival and treatment of women is influenced by lymph node involvement. The aims of this study were to investigate the ability of X-ray CT, MR imaging, and 18F-FDG positron emission tomography (PET) to detect pelvic lymph node metastases by comparing imaging with histopathologic findings after lymph node dissection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Eighteen patients with gynecologic cancers were studied by all three imaging methods before surgery. The images were initially reviewed with routine diagnostic conditions and then, subsequently, by two observers who were unaware of the clinical and histopathologic findings of the patients. The nodal sites were split into upper (aortic to common iliac bifurcations) and lower (common iliac bifurcations to inguinal ligament) iliac chains. All observers' results were statistically analyzed with specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive values, Fisher's exact test (individual observers) or chi-square test (combined observers), and Cohen's kappa test.

RESULTS. Eight of 18 patients had lymph node metastases at histology. Findings of all three modalities agreed in full in only one patient. CT correctly revealed 10 node-negative patients, whereas MR imaging was correct in eight of these patients. 18F-FDG PET correctly depicted one patient with lymph nodes negative for tumor. CT was the most specific imaging modality (97.0%), with MR imaging and PET rendering values of 90.7% and 77.3%, respectively, but sensitivity of all modalities was low (CT, 48.1%; MR imaging, 53.7%; PET, 24.5%). Observer agreement for each modality was good; kappa values among all observers were 0.88 for CT, 0.85 for MR imaging, and 0.72 for PET.

CONCLUSION. CT is the most specific modality for detecting lymph nodes positive for tumor in gynecologic cancers, whereas MR imaging is the most sensitive. The poor results of PET in the pelvis are attributed to urinary 18F-FDG in the ureters or bladder, which may mask or imitate lymph node metastases.


Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
The choice of treatment in gynecologic malignancy is influenced by a physician's prior knowledge of lymph node involvement with tumor. Lymph node metastases are also a vital prognostic factor; 5-year survival of women with node-positive tumors in cervical cancer varies between 42% and 67% [1,2], compared with 87-92% for those with no detectable nodal metastases. Currently, baseline assessment of nodal involvement with tumor is undertaken with cross-sectional imaging on CT or MR imaging, both of which rely on measurement of node size (long axis, short axis, or ratios of the two) [3,4]. However, this assessment does not differentiate reactive enlargement of a node from malignant infiltration. Positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-FDG has been used as a functional method of determining tumor viability in several cancers including those of the head and neck [5,6,7], colon, and lung [8]. This method is based on increased glucose uptake that is associated with malignancy. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to compare cross-sectional (CT, MR) imaging with PET for the detection of pelvic nodal metastases in patients with gynecologic cancers.


Materials and Methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
Women with gynecologic cancers who underwent pelvic imaging on CT, MR imaging, and 18F-FDG PET before pelvic lymph node excision were retrospectively analyzed. CT and MR imaging of the pelvis were performed as routine examinations in these patients, whereas PET was undertaken as a supplementary clinical investigation. Over a 2-year period, 18 patients fulfilled these criteria: 16, cancer of the cervix: seven, squamous cell carcinoma; six, adenocarcinoma; two, adenosquamous cell carcinoma; and one, a rare Wilm's tumor. Of the six patients with adenocarcinoma, two had recurrent disease. One patient had recurrence of endometrial cancer, and one had a vulval melanoma. The mean age of the women was 38.4 years (age range, 14-64 years). Imaging studies and subsequent surgery were performed over a 28-day period in 13 of 18 patients; in one patient, 61 days elapsed between initial imaging and surgery.

CT
Patients had bowel preparation with oral meglumine diatrizoate (Gastrografin; Schering Health Care, West Sussex, United Kingdom) (500 mL of a 2.5% solution) 2 hr before scanning. Images were obtained with Somatom Plus (eight patients) or Somatom Plus 4 (10 patients) scanners (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The patients were scanned from the symphysis pubis to the apex of the lungs, and all scans were contrast-enhanced with 100 mL of iopomide (Ultravist 300; Schering Health Care) [9]. In the Somatom Plus scanner, 10-mm contiguous slices were obtained for the pelvis and abdomen, and 10-mm reconstructed helical CT scans were obtained for the chest [10,11]. Using the Plus 4 helical scanner, we obtained slices with 10-mm thickness image reconstruction in two acquisitions, pelvis to diaphragm and then chest. This procedure ensured that the liver was imaged in the portal phase.

The initial images were reported by 11 radiologists (initial observer).

MR Imaging
Imaging was performed on a 0.5-T super-conducting magnet (Asset; Marconi Medical Systems, Highlands Heights, OH) with a pelvic phased array imaging coil. No prior patient preparation was used. At the start of scanning, each patient received 20 mg of intramuscular hyoscine-N-butylbromide (Buscopan; Boehringer-Ingelheim, Berks, United Kingdom) to reduce bowel motion artifact. The 35-cm field of view covered from the symphysis pubis to the bifurcation of the aorta. Coronal T1-weighted spin-echo (TR/TE, 638/20), short tau inversion recovery fat-suppression sequences (2000/30; inversion time, 107 msec), sagittal T2-weighted fast spin-echo (TR/effective TE, 4000/88), and transverse T1-weighted spin-echo (709/20) images with a slice thickness of 8 mm were obtained.

Initially, the images were reviewed with routine clinical reporting conditions by one radiologist (initial observer) using an Alpha workstation (Digital Electronic Corporation, Houston, TX).

PET
PET whole-body images were obtained with an ECAT ART scanner (Siemens-CTI, Knoxville, TN) with a 16.2-cm axial field of view (reconstructed slice thickness, 10 mm; spatial resolution, 6 mm). The first five patients had no preparation, but the subsequent 13 fasted for at least 12 hr before the scan and had their blood glucose measured. None were excluded on the basis of hyperglycemia. The final 13 patients were well hydrated and given 20 mg of furosemide (Lasix; Borg Medicare, Herts, United Kingdom) intramuscularly to aid renal washout. Patients were injected with 88-222 MBq of 18F-FDG (mean, 165 MBq), and imaging was performed 37-102 min after injection (mean, 55.6 ± 25.3 min). Patients emptied their bladders immediately before scanning. Studies were performed with a whole-body technique, mid thighs to ears, with a scan time of 45 min. Supine patients were scanned in 6-7 bed positions with 7 min in each position. Patients were scanned without initial transmission scans, so final images were not attenuation-corrected [12]. All images were displayed on a workstation monitor as three-dimensional black-and-white images.

Two independent nuclear medicine physicians (initial observer) reviewed the studies initially with routine reporting conditions.

Image Analysis
Subsequently, independent observers, unaware of patient clinical and histopathologic details, assessed images formally for the purposes of this study. For each modality, an observer (first observer) with specialist experience in that particular modality and an observer (second observer) with a more general interest were used. Images were reviewed from either a soft or a hard copy, according to observer preference. Observers used prompt sheets specifying the nodal sites to ensure uniform responses. The nodal regions scored were divided into left and right and upper and lower iliac chain areas.

The upper iliac lymph node chain extended from aortic to iliac bifurcations; the lower iliac node chains extended from the common iliac bifurcations to the inguinal ligaments. These divisions were chosen because they could be easily identified on PET scans and simplified the imaging analysis.

The patients imaged were not consecutive. They were referred for PET scanning on the basis of large stage Ib cervical cancer, small tumors with parametrial extension, or recurrent pelvic disease. Imaging with PET was also dependent on staffing and radiopharmaceutical availability, because this was a new modality in the main imaging department.

Nodal positivity was determined by size on MR imaging and CT; nodes greater than 1-cm long axis were noted as positive for tumor. Findings of focal 18F-FDG uptake along the iliac chains were noted as positive on PET.

Histology
At pelvic lymph node dissection, all tissues were labeled for site and side and documented by the senior operating room technician or assisting clinician. The surgical specimens were fixed in formalin.

The lymph nodes were macroscopically described for size, form, and nature and then embedded in paraffin wax. They were bisected before embedding in paraffin, routinely processed, and stained with H and E before microscopic examination. Any metastases identified were typed to ensure that they were from the primary tumor. Histology was obtained for every lymph node dissected, and all tumors were staged according to the international primary TNM classification [13]. The histologic slides were retrospectively reviewed in all patients. The maximal lengths of all available lymph nodes with positive and negative findings were recorded with a centimeter scale.

Statistical Analysis
Comparison with histology was made for right and left and upper and lower iliac regions for each imaging modality and for each observer. Thus, the number of true-positives, true-negatives, false-positives, and false-negatives for every patient in each of four nodal sites was tabulated.

The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated with standard statistical formula. Cohen's kappa tests [14] were applied to test observer agreement in each modality. Each observer's results for both iliac sites and combined sites were subjected to a Fisher's exact test, a 2 x 2 table with positive/negative findings on histology versus each reviewer's observations. Chi-square tests, a 2 x 2 table with positive and negative findings on histology versus observers, were used for the combined results for all observers of each modality to test the hypothesis that the observers had not arrived at their agreement with histology by chance. A p value of 0.05 was chosen to indicate a 95% probability that the results were achieved by expert observation of the imaging modality.


Results
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
Findings in 10 patients were negative for metastatic lymph nodes, and in the remaining eight, malignant nodes were shown in the upper iliac region (one patient), lower iliac region (five patients), or in both (two patients).

The number of true-positives, true-negatives, false-positives, and false-negatives for every patient in each of four nodal sites was tabulated. Table 1 shows the totals of these figures for each modality, as upper, lower, and combined results.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 1 Combined Observers' Results for All Modalities Compared with Histology

 

Tables 2,3,4 give the sensitivity and specificity results for each radiologist and the combined results for all radiologists for each modality. Table 2 is for the upper, and Table 3 is for the lower iliac region. Sensitivity and specificity for upper and lower iliac sites were similar for each modality. Overall, CT achieved the highest specificity, 97.0%, whereas specificity with MR imaging was 90.7% and with PET, 77.3%. Although the sensitivity was poor on CT (48.1%) and MR imaging (53.7%), it was low for PET (24.5%) (Table 4). A patient with findings of true-positive nodes is illustrated in Figure 1A,1B,1C. Examples of false-positive nodes are shown in Figures 2A,2B and 3.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 2 Sensitivity and Specificity of All Modalities for the Upper Iliac Region

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 3 Sensitivity and Specificity of All Modalities for the Lower Iliac Region

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 4 Sensitivity and Specificity of Modalities for Both Iliac Regions

 


View larger version (73K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1A. 33-year-old woman with endometrial cancer and histologically confirmed lymph node metastases. Transverse CT scan through pelvis shows enlarged lymph node (arrow) in right iliac region above level of common iliac bifurcation.

 


View larger version (167K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1B. 33-year-old woman with endometrial cancer and histologically confirmed lymph node metastases. Coronal spin-echo T1-weighted MR image (TR/TE, 720/20) shows bilateral enlarged lymph nodes (arrows).

 


View larger version (128K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1C. 33-year-old woman with endometrial cancer and histologically confirmed lymph node metastases. Coronal positron emission tomography scan shows foci of increased uptake in both iliac chains (black arrow) and in left supraclavicular region (white arrow).

 


View larger version (145K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2A. 26-year-old woman with clinical stage I cervical cancer and histology negative for tumor. Coronal spin-echo T1-weighted MR image (TR/TE, 720/20) through mid pelvis shows enlarged lower iliac node on right (arrow).

 


View larger version (130K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2B. 26-year-old woman with clinical stage I cervical cancer and histology negative for tumor. Coronal short tau inversion recovery MR image (TR/TE, 2500/30; inversion time, 107 msec) through mid pelvis, at same level as A, shows enlarged lower iliac node on right (arrow).

 


View larger version (149K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3. Coronal positron emission tomography scan of 42-year-old woman with cervical cancer shows focus of increased uptake in left lower iliac region (arrow). Histology of lymph nodes was negative for tumor.

 

Positive and negative predictive values are given in Table 5. The results for each modality were similar for upper and lower iliac sites. For both iliac sites combined, CT had the highest positive predictive value (0.83) and a negative predictive value equal to MR imaging (0.85), whereas PET had the lowest positive predictive value (0.26), because of the high number of false-positive findings.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 5 Positive and Negative Predictive Values for Each Modality

 

Observer Agreement
The results of Cohen's kappa tests of agreement among all radiologists for each modality are given in Table 6.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
TABLE 6 Agreement Between Observers for Each Imaging Modality for Combined Iliac Sites

 

For CT, the agreement among all observers for upper and lower iliac node sites combined was good, with kappa values for observer combinations varying between 0.85 and 0.94. CT had the highest agreement among all observers ({kappa} = 0.88). For MR imaging, kappa values were also high (0.81-0.87). Agreements among observers for the nodal sites combined in PET were good, albeit slightly lower ({kappa} = 0.64-0.79).

The Fisher's exact test indicated that it was unlikely that any CT observers would have reached their agreement with histology by chance, because all observers had probability scores of less than 0.05. With MR imaging, the Fisher's exact test also indicated that observers were unlikely to have arrived at their results by chance (p < 0.05). For PET, the results of Fisher's exact test for upper and lower iliac sites separately and for the iliac sites combined was more than 0.05, indicating a greater than 5% probability that all observers could have arrived at their results by chance.

Agreement Among Modalities
Findings on all three modalities agreed on all sites in only one node-negative patient. CT correctly reported all 10 node-negative patients, whereas findings on MR imaging agreed in eight of these. 18F-FDG PET correctly showed one patient with a true-negative lymph node status.

Histologic Analysis
Five hundred and four lymph nodes were resected and documented. Macroscopic-length measurements in 33 of 34 nodes containing metastatic deposits were obtained (Fig. 4). The mean length of positive nodes was 1.1 ± 0.6 cm (median, 0.9 cm; range, 0.2-2.3 cm). Of the nodes recorded as positive for tumor, 54.5% were less than 1.0 cm in length (45.5% >= 1.0 cm in length). Four hundred seventy nodes were negative for tumor, and it was possible to obtain length measurements in 314 of these. The mean length of negative nodes was 0.7 ± 0.5 cm (median, 0.6-cm; range, 0.1-2.5 cm). Of the nodes negative for tumor, 22.6% were equal to or greater than 1.0 cm in length (77.4% > 1.0 cm in length). The difference in the length of positive and negative lymph nodes recorded on macroscopy was significant (p = 0.0).



View larger version (163K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4. Photomicrograph of microscopic deposit in lymph node (arrow) of 62-year-old woman with cervical cancer shows overall length to be 14.5 cm. (H and E, x5)

 


Discussion
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
This study emphasizes the difficulties of detecting lymph nodes involved with tumor in the pelvis with cross-sectional imaging and PET. The problems encountered with cross-sectional imaging modalities have led to repeated investigation of the criteria by which such nodes are identified to improve the sensitivity of detection [15,16,17]. The intrinsic problem has always been separating normal-sized nodes with tumor deposits from nodes that may be reactively enlarged. Traditionally, a single long-axis measurement of the node is used, but lately, both long- and short-axes measurements and even ratios have been tried [4]. Some systems take into account nodal shape with round nodes scoring higher for malignant involvement than ovoid or elongated ones [18].

With the advent of newer imaging modalities such as MR imaging and PET, it was hoped that other criteria such as the signal intensity [17] of the node or its metabolic status [5,6,7] might prove a more sensitive indicator of disease. However, preliminary results have been disappointing, and morphologic criteria alone are used. Further refinements include contrast enhancement [18, 19] and studies of oxygenation of the node [20], but even in a research setting, these parameters remain unreliable. This study, therefore, used size criteria alone to detect lymph nodes positive for tumor with respect to CT and MR imaging. As in others, this study also used a 1-cm-long axis cutoff [5, 16]. A lower figure would reduce the specificity, particularly in the pelvis where adjacent bowel creates difficulties with partial volume effects.

The positive predictive value of CT was higher than that of the other two modalities. CT was, thus, of intermediate sensitivity, but highly specific. On MR imaging, observers obtained equal or slightly higher sensitivity ratings than on CT, because contrast between tissues was better on T2-weighted MR sequences. However, specificity was slightly lower. The positive predictive values for MR imaging were, therefore, low, because both observers had a number of false-positive findings. Low sensitivity and specificity results were obtained overall for PET imaging. These results were disappointing, because PET has become more widely used for staging of head and neck cancers, in lung cancer, and in malignant melanoma [5,6,7,8,21]. This study emphasized the many problems facing 18F-FDG PET in the pelvis [22]. Residues of 18F-FDG can sometimes be seen in the ureters and in the bladder, masking or imitating metastases. These technical problems must be addressed to improve the specificity of the technique [23].Go



View larger version (86K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5. Photomicrograph of lymph node in 33-year-old woman with endometrial cancer shows node largely replaced by tumor. Overall length is 8.0 cm. (H and E, x5)

 

The requirement for histologic correlation after node dissection introduced bias into the study. Patients with unequivocally enlarged nodes would not have undergone surgical lymph node dissection but would have been selected for radiation therapy and would, therefore, have been excluded from analysis. Also, patients with small primary tumors and nodes not enlarged on initial investigation with cross-sectional imaging may not have been referred routinely for PET scanning. The population selected will, thus, have been patients destined for surgical lymph node dissection with a likelihood of small lymph node metastases.

Observer bias was minimized by using a uniform prompt sheet and by ensuring the first and second observers were unaware of the clinical and histopathologic details. CT is a well-established imaging modality, and as expected, the overall agreement among radiologists reviewing CT was high. In view of the good agreement among multiple observers, it can be concluded that the shortcomings of this modality are due to the choice of criteria for detection of the lymph nodes positive for tumor and technical factors rather than to observers' abilities. MR imaging is also routinely used for pelvic imaging, and, as with CT, the agreement among radiologists reviewing this modality was good. With PET, observers agreed on 11 patients for both the upper and lower iliac regions. This was good agreement in the modality, but only four agreed observations were correct compared with histology. There were no true-positive reports on which all three observers agreed. The use of PET in the pelvis is a relatively new phenomenon [24], and the poor results may be attributed partly to lack of observer experience.

CT has the advantages of better total-body coverage and short scanning time. Radiation dose is not an issue in this group of patients. The limitations of MR imaging are long scanning times and poor total-body coverage, but it offers superior definition of the primary disease. PET performs poorly in the pelvis because of inherent problems of imaging the pelvis with 18F-FDG. These problems currently are being addressed with further improvements in patient preparation. A combination of morphologic and functional techniques or multitracer PET studies may improve sensitivity further.

Cross-sectional imaging modalities are only moderately sensitive for detection of lymph node metastases in the pelvis, based on size criteria. However, a functional technique with a glucose analogue (18F-FDG) PET also performs poorly because of radioactive residues in the ureters and bladder.


Acknowledgments
 
We thank Daphne Glass for her invaluable help with the PET studies, Jayne Morgan for help with CT, T. Krausz for his help with the histologic analysis, and B. Puri for his statistical advice. We are grateful to Mary Crisp for her secretarial assistance.


References
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 

  1. Tanaka Y, Sawada S, Murata T. Relationship between lymph node metastases and prognosis in patients irradiated postoperatively for carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Acta Radiol Oncol 1984;23:455 -459[Medline]
  2. Anderson MC, Coulter CAE, Mason WP, Soutter WP. Malignant disease of the cervix. In: Shaw RW, Soutter WP, Stanton Sl, eds. Gynecology, 2nd Ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997: 541-568
  3. Carrington B. Lymph Nodes. In: Husband JES, Reznek RH, eds. Imaging in oncology, Oxford, England: ISIS Medical Media, 1998: 729-748
  4. Steinkamp HJ, Cornehl M, Hosten N, Pegios W, Vogl T, Felix R. Cervical lymphadenopathy: ratio of long- to short-axis diameter as a predictor of malignancy. Br J Radiol 1995;68:266 -270[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Adams S, Baum RP, Stuckensen T, Bitter K, Hor G. Prospective comparison of 18F-FDG PET with conventional imaging modalities (CT, MR imaging, US) in lymph node staging of head and neck cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:1255 -1260[Medline]
  6. Braams JW, Pruim J, Freling NJ, et al. Detection of lymph node metastases of squamous-cell cancer of the head and neck with FDG-PET and MR imaging. J Nucl Med 1995;36:211 -216[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Laubenbacher C, Saumweber D, Wagner-Manslau C, et al. Comparison of fluorine-18-fluorode-oxyglucose PET, MR imaging and endoscopy for staging head and neck squamous-cell carcinomas. J Nucl Med 1995;36:1747 -1757[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Steinert HC, Hauser M, Allemann F, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: nodal staging with FDG PET versus CT with correlative lymph node mapping and sampling. Radiology 1997;202:441 -446[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Gocke P, Gocke C, Neuman K, Henseke P, Langer R, Muller RD. Prospective randomized study for an injection protocol for intravenous contrast media in abdominal and pelvic helical CT. Acta Radiol 1999;40:515 -520[Medline]
  10. Fukuda H, Nakagawa T, Shibuya H. Metastases to pelvic lymph node from carcinoma in the pelvic cavity: diagnosis using thin-section CT. Clin Radiol 1999;54:237 -242[Medline]
  11. Naik KS, Spencer JA, Craven CM, MacLennan KA, Robinson PJ. Staging lymphoma with CT: comparison of contiguous and alternate 10-mm slice techniques. Clin Radiol 1998;53:523 -527[Medline]
  12. Bailey DL. Transmission scanning in emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:774 -787[Medline]
  13. Sobin L, Wittekind C. TNM Classification of malignant tumors. New York: Wiley, 1997:131 -164
  14. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psych Meas 1960;20:37 -46
  15. Matsukuma K, Tsukamoto N, Matsuyama T, Ono M, Nakano H. Preoperative CT study of lymph nodes in cervical cancer: its correlation with histological findings. Gynecol Oncol 1989;33:168 -171[Medline]
  16. Kim SH, Choi BI, Han JK. Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MR imaging in 99 patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993;17:633 -640[Medline]
  17. Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI, Han MC. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology 1994;190:807 -811[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Kvistad KA, Rydland J, Smethurst HB, Lundgren S, Fjosne HE, Haraldseth O. Axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer: pre-operative detection with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2000;10:1464 -1471[Medline]
  19. Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY, Cheung TH, Metreweli C. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR 2000;175:759 -766[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Robinson SP, Collinridge DR, Howe FA, Rodrigues LM, Chaplin DJ, Griffiths JR. Tumor response to hypercapnia and hyperoxia monitored by FLOOD magnetic resonance imaging. NMR Biomed 1999;12:98 -106[Medline]
  21. Gritters LS, Francis IR, Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Initial assessment of positron emission tomography using 2-fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in the imaging of malignant melanoma. J Nucl Med 1993;34:1420 -1427[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Strauss LG. Fluorine-18 deoxyglucose and false-positive results: a major problem in the diagnostics of oncological patients. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:1409 -1415[Medline]
  23. Moran JK, Lee HB, Blaufox MD. Optimization of urinary FDG excretion during PET Imaging. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1352 -1357[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Heicappell R, Muller-Mattheis V, Reinhardt M, et al. Staging of pelvic lymph nodes in neoplasms of the bladder and prostate by positron emission tomography with 2-[(18)F]-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Eur Urol 1999;36:582 -587[Medline]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
P. Narayanan, T. Iyngkaran, S. A. Sohaib, R. H. Reznek, and A. G. Rockall
Pearls and Pitfalls of MR Lymphography in Gynecologic Malignancy1
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2009; 29(4): 1057 - 1069.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Jpn J Clin OncolHome page
Y. Tsunoda, M. Ito, H. Fujii, H. Kuwano, and N. Saito
Preoperative Diagnosis of Lymph Node Metastases of Colorectal Cancer by FDG-PET/CT
Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2008; 38(5): 347 - 353.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
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]


Home page
JCOHome page
H.-H. Chou, T.-C. Chang, T.-C. Yen, K.-K. Ng, S. Hsueh, S.-Y. Ma, C.-J. Chang, H.-J. Huang, A. Chao, T.-I Wu, et al.
Low Value of [18F]-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose Positron Emission Tomography in Primary Staging of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Before Radical Hysterectomy
J. Clin. Oncol., January 1, 2006; 24(1): 123 - 128.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. Sironi, A. Buda, M. Picchio, P. Perego, R. Moreni, A. Pellegrino, M. Colombo, C. Mangioni, C. Messa, and F. Fazio
Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients with Clinical Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: Detection with Integrated FDG PET/CT
Radiology, December 1, 2005; 238(1): 272 - 279.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
R. G. H. Beets-Tan and G. L. Beets
Rectal Cancer: Review with Emphasis on MR Imaging
Radiology, August 1, 2004; 232(2): 335 - 346.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
T.-C. Yen, K.-K. Ng, S.-Y. Ma, H.-H. Chou, C.-S. Tsai, S. Hsueh, T.-C. Chang, J.-H. Hong, L.-C. See, W.-J. Lin, et al.
Value of Dual-Phase 2-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose Positron Emission Tomography in Cervical Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2003; 21(19): 3651 - 3658.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNMHome page
T. Torizuka, T. Kanno, M. Futatsubashi, H. Okada, E. Yoshikawa, F. Nakamura, M. Takekuma, M. Maeda, and Y. Ouchi
Imaging of Gynecologic Tumors: Comparison of 11C-Choline PET with 18F-FDG PET
J. Nucl. Med., July 1, 2003; 44(7): 1051 - 1056.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
C. U. Herborn, T. C. Lauenstein, F. M. Vogt, R. B. Lauffer, J. F. Debatin, and S. G. Ruehm
Interstitial MR Lymphography with MS-325: Characterization of Normal and Tumor-Invaded Lymph Nodes in a Rabbit Model
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2002; 179(6): 1567 - 1572.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. A. Siegel, L. P. Adler, R. L. Wahl, A. Williams, N. DeSouza, and A. M. Peters
FDG Positron Emission Tomography Detection of Pelvic Nodal Metastases in Gynecologic Cancer
Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2002; 178 (3): 762 - 764.
[Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Williams, A. D.
Right arrow Articles by deSouza, N. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Williams, A. D.
Right arrow Articles by deSouza, N. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS