Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 8/2009

01-08-2009 | Magnetic Resonance

Node-by-node correlation between MR and PET/CT in patients with uterine cervical cancer: diffusion-weighted imaging versus size-based criteria on T2WI

Authors: Eugene K. Choi, Jeong Kon Kim, Hyuck Jae Choi, Seong Ho Park, Bum-Woo Park, Namkug Kim, Jae Seung Kim, Ki Chun Im, Gyunggoo Cho, Kyoung-Sik Cho

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 8/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to perform a node-by-node comparison of an ADC-based diagnosis and various size-based criteria on T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) with regard to their correlation with PET/CT findings in patients with uterine cervical cancer. In 163 patients with 339 pelvic lymph nodes (LNs) with short-axis diameter >5 mm, the minimum apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), mean ADC, short- and long-axis diameters, and ratio of long- to short-axis diameters (L/S ratio) were compared in PET/CT-positive and -negative LNs. On PET/CT, 118 (35%) LNs in 58 patients were positive. The mean value of minimum and mean ADCs, short- and long-axis diameters, and L/S ratio were different in PET/CT-positive (0.6436 × 10−3 mm2/s, 0.756 × 10−3 mm2/s, 10.3 mm, 13.2 mm, 1.32, respectively) and PET/CT-negative LNs (0.8893 × 10−3 mm2/s, 1.019 × 10−3 mm2/s, 7.4 mm, 11.0 mm, 1.49, respectively) (P < 0.05). The Az value of the minimum ADC (0.864) was greater than those of mean ADC (0.836), short-axis diameter (0.764), long-axis diameter (0.640) and L/S ratio (0.652) (P < 0.05). The sensitivity and accuracy of the minimum ADC (86%, 82%) were greater than those of the short-axis diameter (55%, 74%), long-axis diameter (73%, 58%) and L/S ratio (52%, 66%) (P < 0.05). ADC showed superior correlation with PET/CT compared with conventional size-based criteria on T2WI.
Literature
1.
Kamura T, Tsukamoto N, Tsuruchi N et al (1992) Multivariate analysis of the histopathologic prognostic factors of cervical cancer in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy. Cancer 69:181–186PubMedCrossRef
2.
Inoue T, Morita K (1990) The prognostic significance of number of positive nodes in cervical carcinoma stages IB, IIA, and IIB. Cancer 65:1923–1927PubMedCrossRef
3.
Girardi F, Haas J (1993) The importance of the histologic processing of pelvic lymph nodes in the treatment of cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 3:12–17PubMedCrossRef
4.
Michel G, Morice P, Castaigne D et al (1998) Lymphatic spread in stage Ib and II cervical carcinoma: anatomy and surgical implications. Obstet Gynecol 91:360–363PubMedCrossRef
5.
Bellomi M, Bonomo G, Landoni F et al (2005) Accuracy of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of lymph node involvement in cervix carcinoma. Eur Radiol 15:2469–2474PubMedCrossRef
6.
Bipat S, Glas AS, van der Velden J et al (2003) Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 91:6059–6066CrossRef
7.
Choi HJ, Kim SH, Seo SS et al (2006) MRI for pretreatment lymph node staging in uterine cervical cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:W538–W543PubMedCrossRef
8.
Choi HJ, Roh JW, Seo SS et al (2006) Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma: a prospective study. Cancer 106:914–922PubMedCrossRef
9.
Kim SH, Choi BI, Han JK et al (1993) Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MRI in 99 patients. J Comput Assist Tomogr 17:633–640PubMedCrossRef
10.
Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D et al (2001) Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 218:776–782PubMed
11.
Roy C, Le Bras Y, Mangold L et al (1997) Small pelvic lymph node metastases: evaluation with MR imaging. Clin Radiol 52:437–440PubMedCrossRef
12.
Williams AD, Cousins C, Soutter WP et al (2001) Detection of pelvic lymph node metastases in gynecologic malignancy: a comparison of CT, MR imaging, and positron emission tomography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:343–348PubMed
13.
Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY et al (2000) Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:759–766PubMed
14.
Kim JK, Kim KA, Park BW et al (2008) Feasibility of diffusion-weighted imaging in the differentiation of metastatic from nonmetastatic lymph nodes: early experience. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:714–719PubMedCrossRef
15.
Lin G, Ho KC, Wang JJ et al (2008) Detection of lymph node metastasis in cervical and uterine cancers by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:128–135PubMedCrossRef
16.
Nakai G, Matsuki M, Inada Y et al (2008) Detection and evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with gynecologic malignancies using body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32:764–768PubMedCrossRef
17.
Sironi S, Buda A, Picchio M et al (2006) Lymph node metastasis in patients with clinical early-stage cervical cancer: detection with integrated FDG PET/CT. Radiology 238:272–279PubMedCrossRef
18.
Sugawara Y, Eisbruch A, Kosuda S et al (1999) Evaluation of FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 40:1125–1131PubMed
19.
Schoder H, Yeung HW, Gonen M et al (2004) Head and neck cancer: clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology 231:65–72PubMedCrossRef
20.
Hein PA, Kremser C, Judmaier W et al (2003) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for monitoring diffusion changes in rectal carcinoma during combined, preoperative chemoradiation: preliminary results of a prospective study. Eur J Radiol 45:214–222PubMedCrossRef
21.
Kim JK, Kim KA, Park BW et al (2008) Feasibility of diffusion weighted imaging in the differentiation of metastatic from non-metastatic lymph nodes: early experience. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:714–719PubMedCrossRef
22.
Naganawa S, Sato C, Kumada H et al (2005) Apparent diffusion coefficient in cervical cancer of the uterus: comparison with the normal uterine cervix. Eur Radiol 15:71–78PubMedCrossRef
23.
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1983) A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148:839–843PubMed
24.
Bewick V, Cheek L, Ball J (2004) Statistics review 13: receiver operating characteristic curves. Crit Care 8:508–512PubMedCrossRef
25.
Sakuragi N, Satoh C, Takeda N et al (1999) Incidence and distribution pattern of pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with Stages IB, IIA, and IIB cervical carcinoma treated with radical hysterectomy. Cancer 85:1547–1554PubMedCrossRef
26.
Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI et al (1994) Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology 190:807–811PubMed
27.
Harisinghani MG, Barentsz J, Hahn PF et al (2003) Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 348:2491–2499PubMedCrossRef
28.
Choi SH, Kim SH, Choi HJ et al (2004) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: results of prospective study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 28:620–627PubMedCrossRef
29.
Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG et al (1988) Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology 166:623–631PubMed
30.
Kim JH, Beets GL, Kim MJ et al (2004) High-resolution MR imaging for nodal staging in rectal cancer: are there any criteria in addition to the size? Eur J Radiol 52:78–83PubMedCrossRef
31.
Chen AC, Sung WH, Wang PH et al (2002) Correlation of three-dimensional tumor volumetry with cervical cancer prognostic parameters. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 23:401–404PubMed
32.
Kodaira T, Fuwa N, Toita T et al (2003) Comparison of prognostic value of MRI and FIGO stage among patients with cervical carcinoma treated with radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56:769–777PubMed
33.
Sumi M, Sakihama N, Sumi T et al (2003) Discrimination of metastatic cervical lymph nodes with diffusion-weighted MR imaging in patients with head and neck cancer. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 24:1627–1634PubMed
34.
Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E et al (2008) Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1652–1658PubMedCrossRef
35.
DeLano MC, Cooper TG, Siebert JE et al (2000) High-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging of adult brain: image contrast and apparent diffusion coefficient map features. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 21:1830–1836PubMed
Metadata
Title
Node-by-node correlation between MR and PET/CT in patients with uterine cervical cancer: diffusion-weighted imaging versus size-based criteria on T2WI
Authors
Eugene K. Choi
Jeong Kon Kim
Hyuck Jae Choi
Seong Ho Park
Bum-Woo Park
Namkug Kim
Jae Seung Kim
Ki Chun Im
Gyunggoo Cho
Kyoung-Sik Cho
Publication date
01-08-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 8/2009
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1350-5

Other articles of this Issue 8/2009

European Radiology 8/2009 Go to the issue

Cardiac

Value of multidetector computed tomography evaluation of myocardial perfusion in the assessment of ischemic heart disease: comparison with nuclear perfusion imaging

Contrast Media

Thoracic and abdominal MRA with gadofosveset: Influence of injection rate on vessel signal and image quality

Neuro

In vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy of intraventricular tumours of the brain

Gastrointestinal

Primary uncleansed 2D versus primary electronically cleansed 3D in limited bowel preparation CT-colonography. Is there a difference for novices and experienced readers?

Urogenital

Acute idiopathic scrotal edema: ultrasonographic findings at an emergency unit

Cardiac

Coronary CT angiography: automatic cardiac-phase selection for image reconstruction