Vol 93, No 1 (2022)
Review paper
Published online: 2021-12-27
Diagnostic imaging in gynecology
1
, 2
, 2
Abstract
Ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the “gold standard” among gynecological imaging methods. They are important diagnostic tools used to determine the site of origin of a pelvic mass and to characterize the adnexal lesions. This paper summarizes the diagnostic performance of ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in various gynecological diseases and tumours diagnostics.
Keywords: oncologycancercomputed tomographymagnetic resonance imaging
References
- Kang SK, Reinhold C, Atri M, et al. Expert Panel on Women’s Imaging:, Expert Panel on Women’s Imaging:. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Ovarian Cancer Screening. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017; 14(11S): S490–S499.
- Gomes Ferreira M, Sancho de Salas M, González Sarmiento R, et al. Changes in the Management and Prognosis of Ovarian Cancer Due to the New FIGO and WHO Classifications: A Case Series Observational Descriptive Study. Seven Years of Follow-up. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018; 28(8): 1461–1470.
- Javadi S, Ganeshan DM, Qayyum A, et al. Ovarian Cancer, the Revised FIGO Staging System, and the Role of Imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016; 206(6): 1351–1360.
- Lenhard MS, Burges A, Johnson TRC, et al. PET-CT in recurrent ovarian cancer: impact on treatment planning. Anticancer Res. 2008; 28(4C): 2303–2308.
- Grisaru D, Almog B, Levine C, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT in patients with gynecological malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2004; 94(3): 680–684.
- Son H, Khan SM, Rahaman J, et al. Role of FDG PET/CT in staging of recurrent ovarian cancer. Radiographics. 2011; 31(2): 569–583.
- Théodore C, Levaillant JM, Capmas P, et al. MRI and Ultrasound Fusion Imaging for Cervical Cancer. Anticancer Res. 2017; 37(9): 5079–5085.
- Devine C, Viswanathan C, Faria S, et al. [18F]-2-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-glucose-PET Assessment of Cervical Cancer. PET Clin. 2018; 13(2): 165–177.
- Brito Pires NM, Godoi ET, Oliveira DC, et al. Impact of pelvic magnetic resonance imaging findings in the indication of uterine artery embolization in the treatment of myoma. Ginekol Pol. 2017; 88(3): 129–133.
- Berek JS, Matsuo K, Grubbs BH, et al. Multidisciplinary perspectives on newly revised 2018 FIGO staging of cancer of the cervix uteri. J Gynecol Oncol. 2019; 30(2): e40.
- Van Calster B, Van Hoorde K, Valentin L, et al. International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Group. Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. BMJ. 2014; 349: g5920.
- Sala E, Wakely S, Senior E, et al. MRI of malignant neoplasms of the uterine corpus and cervix. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 188(6): 1577–1587.
- Cerci ZC, Sakarya DK, Yetimalar MH, et al. Computed tomography as a predictor of the extent of the disease and surgical outcomes in ovarian cancer. Ginekol Pol. 2016; 87(5): 326–332.
- Suppiah S, Chang WL, Hassan HA, et al. Systematic Review on the Accuracy of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Management of Ovarian Cancer: Is Functional Information Really Needed? World J Nucl Med. 2017; 16(3): 176–185.
- Wahl AO, Gaffney DK, Jhingran A, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Adjuvant Management of Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2016; 30(9): 816–822.
- Hricak H, Chen M, Coakley FV, et al. Complex adnexal masses: detection and characterization with MR imaging--multivariate analysis. Radiology. 2000; 214(1): 39–46.
- Rieber A, Nüssle K, Stöhr I, et al. Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors with MR imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001; 177(1): 123–129.
- Pandharipande PV, Lowry KP, Reinhold C, et al. Expert Panel on Women’s Imaging:. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Ovarian Cancer Screening. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017; 14(11S): S490–S499.
- Yanarateş A, Budak E. Prognostic role of PET/CT in endometrial cancer. Ginekol Pol. 2019; 90(9): 491–495.
- Lee SI, Atri M. 2018 FIGO Staging System for Uterine Cervical Cancer: Enter Cross-sectional Imaging. Radiology. 2019; 292(1): 15–24.
- Siegel CL, Andreotti RF, Cardenes HR, et al. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® pretreatment planning of invasive cancer of the cervix. J Am Coll Radiol. 2012; 9(6): 395–402.
- Epstein E, Testa A, Gaurilcikas A, et al. Early-stage cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound - a European multicenter trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2013; 128(3): 449–453.
- Choi HJ, Ju W, Myung SK, et al. Diagnostic performance of computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: meta-analysis. Cancer Sci. 2010; 101(6): 1471–1479.
- Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(12): 2108–2113.
- Trial M, Atri M, Epid D, et al. Identification of Distant Metastatic Disease in Uterine Cervical and Endometrial Cancers with FDG PET / CT. Radiology 000. 2018.
