open access

Vol 20, No 3 (2015)
Original research articles
Published online: 2015-05-01
Submitted: 2014-06-20
Get Citation

Local experience in cervical cancer imaging: Comparison in tumour assessment between TRUS and MRI

Claudia Ordeanu, Diana Cristina Pop, Radu Badea, Csaba Csutak, Nicolae Todor, Calin Ordeanu, Reka Kerekes, Ovidiu Coza, Viorica Nagy, Patriciu Achimas-Cadariu, Alexandru Irimie
DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2015.01.003
·
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2015;20(3):223-230.

open access

Vol 20, No 3 (2015)
Original research articles
Published online: 2015-05-01
Submitted: 2014-06-20

Abstract

Objective

The aim of study was to analyze the accuracy of TRUS (transrectal ultrasound) vs. MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and clinical gynecological examination estimation in the evaluation of tumor dimensions.

Methods

The patients inclusion criterion included primarily pathologically squamous cell carcinoma, but excluded were patients who had not undergone BT (brachytherapy) and treated with palliative intent. We offer two types of treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer: (a) radiochemotherapy followed by surgery and (b) exclusive radiochemotherapy. Imaging tests follow the presence of tumor and tumor size (width and thickness). Each examination was performed by a different physician who had no knowledge of the others’ findings. All patients underwent MRI prior to EBRT (external beam radiation therapy) while 18 of them also at the time of the first brachytherapy application. For the analysis we used the r-Pearson correlation coefficient.

Results

In 2013, 26 patients with cervical cancer were included. A total of 44 gynecological examinations were performed, 44 MRIs and 18 TRUSs. For the comparisons prior to EBRT the correlation coefficient between TRUS vs. MRI was r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.79 for AP and r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.83 for LL, for GYN vs. MRI was r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.6 for AP and r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.75 for LL. Prior to BT for GYN vs. MRI, r values were 0.60 and 0.63 for AP and LL, respectively; for GYN vs. TRUS, r values were 0.56 and 0.78 for AP and LL, respectively.

Conclusions

A high correlation between the three examinations was obtained. As such, TRUS can be considered a suitable method in the evaluation of tumor dimensions.

Abstract

Objective

The aim of study was to analyze the accuracy of TRUS (transrectal ultrasound) vs. MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and clinical gynecological examination estimation in the evaluation of tumor dimensions.

Methods

The patients inclusion criterion included primarily pathologically squamous cell carcinoma, but excluded were patients who had not undergone BT (brachytherapy) and treated with palliative intent. We offer two types of treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer: (a) radiochemotherapy followed by surgery and (b) exclusive radiochemotherapy. Imaging tests follow the presence of tumor and tumor size (width and thickness). Each examination was performed by a different physician who had no knowledge of the others’ findings. All patients underwent MRI prior to EBRT (external beam radiation therapy) while 18 of them also at the time of the first brachytherapy application. For the analysis we used the r-Pearson correlation coefficient.

Results

In 2013, 26 patients with cervical cancer were included. A total of 44 gynecological examinations were performed, 44 MRIs and 18 TRUSs. For the comparisons prior to EBRT the correlation coefficient between TRUS vs. MRI was r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.79 for AP and r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.83 for LL, for GYN vs. MRI was r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.6 for AP and r[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]=[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.75 for LL. Prior to BT for GYN vs. MRI, r values were 0.60 and 0.63 for AP and LL, respectively; for GYN vs. TRUS, r values were 0.56 and 0.78 for AP and LL, respectively.

Conclusions

A high correlation between the three examinations was obtained. As such, TRUS can be considered a suitable method in the evaluation of tumor dimensions.

Get Citation

Keywords

Cervical cancer; MRI; Transrectal ultrasound; Gynecological clinical examination

About this article
Title

Local experience in cervical cancer imaging: Comparison in tumour assessment between TRUS and MRI

Journal

Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy

Issue

Vol 20, No 3 (2015)

Pages

223-230

Published online

2015-05-01

DOI

10.1016/j.rpor.2015.01.003

Bibliographic record

Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2015;20(3):223-230.

Keywords

Cervical cancer
MRI
Transrectal ultrasound
Gynecological clinical examination

Authors

Claudia Ordeanu
Diana Cristina Pop
Radu Badea
Csaba Csutak
Nicolae Todor
Calin Ordeanu
Reka Kerekes
Ovidiu Coza
Viorica Nagy
Patriciu Achimas-Cadariu
Alexandru Irimie

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: journals@viamedica.pl