Anticancer research · 2018
Preoperative Evaluation of Myometrial Invasion in Endometrial Carcinoma: Prospective Intra-individual Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Volumetry, Diffusion-weighted and Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Thieme Stefan Felix, Collettini Federico, Sehouli Jalid, Biocca Lucio, Lella Alessandra, Wagner Moritz, Almuheimid Jumana, Plett Helmut, Muallem Mustafa Zelal
Аннотация
AIM: The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE) and volumetric analyses in the preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion in patients with endometrial carcinoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients with endometrial cancer underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging including DWI and DCE for evaluation of the depth of myometrial invasion and volumetric analyses [tumor volume (TV), uterine volume (UV), tumor to volume ratio (TVR=(TV/TU)×100)]. The results of the evaluations were compared to the histopathological examinations.
RESULTS: DWI and DCE showed a sensitivity and specificity in evaluating the depth of myometrial invasion of 92% and 96% and 92% and 86%, respectively, while volumetric analyses showed a sensitivity and specificity of 85% and 86% (TVR cut-off=10%) and 69% and 100% (TVR cut-off=25%), respectively.
CONCLUSION: DWI and DCE are both good diagnostic tools for the preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion. From our results and literature research, there is potential for omitting gadolinium-based contrast agents given the high diagnostic value of DWI. In our patient collective, the predictive power of volumetric analyses was lower than that of DWI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients with endometrial cancer underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging including DWI and DCE for evaluation of the depth of myometrial invasion and volumetric analyses [tumor volume (TV), uterine volume (UV), tumor to volume ratio (TVR=(TV/TU)×100)]. The results of the evaluations were compared to the histopathological examinations.
RESULTS: DWI and DCE showed a sensitivity and specificity in evaluating the depth of myometrial invasion of 92% and 96% and 92% and 86%, respectively, while volumetric analyses showed a sensitivity and specificity of 85% and 86% (TVR cut-off=10%) and 69% and 100% (TVR cut-off=25%), respectively.
CONCLUSION: DWI and DCE are both good diagnostic tools for the preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion. From our results and literature research, there is potential for omitting gadolinium-based contrast agents given the high diagnostic value of DWI. In our patient collective, the predictive power of volumetric analyses was lower than that of DWI.