PET/MRI在宫颈癌分期及盆腔淋巴结转移评价中的临床应用研究

doi:DOI:10.12117/jccmi.2019.05.008

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (0)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the clinical value of PET/MRI in staging cervical cancer and diagnosing pelvic lymph node metastasis. Methods: Seventy patients with cervical cancer were prospectively enrolled to perform pelvic PET/MRI and whole-body PET scan before treatment. All the images were evaluated by two experienced radiologists. Kappa consistency test and the paired chi-square test(P<0.05) were separately used to evaluate the consistency and difference of PET/MRI staging and clinical staging. The diagnostic value of PET/MRI for pelvic lymph node metastasis was analyzed by using diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity. Statistical software SPSS 22.0 was employed for the analysis. Results: Compared with the reference standard, the diagnostic consistency of PET/MRI staging for cervical cancer was satisfactory(Kappa=0.908), the consistency of clinical staging was fair(Kappa=0.542), there was a significant difference between PET/MRI staging and clinical staging(?字2=9.278, P<0.05). In patient-based analysis, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of PET/MRI for pelvic lymph node metastasis were respectively 92.86％, 92.31％, 93.18％; In lymph node-based analysis, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of PET/MRI were respectively 93.62％, 90.32％, 94.10％. Conclusion: The diagnostic value of PET/MR for staging of cervical cancer is obviously superior to clinical staging, which can be used as a one-stop inspection method for cervical cancer by accurately determining and positioning pelvic lymph node metastasis.

Key words： Cervix neoplasms Lymphatic metastasis Magnetic resonance imaging Positron-emission tomography

Received: 22 May 2018

PACS:	Ｒ737.33
	Ｒ445.2
	Ｒ817.4

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors

Cite this article:

URL:

http://www.jccmi.com.cn/EN/DOI:10.12117/jccmi.2019.05.008 OR http://www.jccmi.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V30/I5/337

[1]Forouzanfar MH, Foreman KJ, Delossantos AM, et al. Breast and cervical cancer in 187 countries between 1980 and 2010: a systematic analysis[J]. Lancet, 2011, 378(9801): 1461-1484.
[2]Shirazi S, Razi T, Cheraghi F, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging versus Clinical Staging in Cervical Cancer[J]. Asian Pacific J Cancer Prevention, 2014, 15(14): 5729-5732.
[3]Miccò M, Sala E, Lakhman Y, et al. Role of imaging in the pretreatment evaluation of common gynecological cancers[J]. Womens Health(Lond Engl), 2014, 10(3): 299-321.
[4]Testa AC, Di Legge A, De Blasis I, et al. Imaging techniques for the evaluation of cervical cancer[J]. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 2014, 28(5): 741-768.
[5]尚靳，郭启勇，孙洪赞，等. CT、MRI及与PET融合显像评价宫颈癌分期及淋巴结转移中的应用进展[J]. 中国医学影像技术，2016，32（5）：795-798.
[6]Beiderwellen K, Grueneisen J, Ruhlmann V, et al. [18F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT for whole-body staging in patients with recurrent malignancies of the female pelvis: initial results[J}. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2015, 42(1): 56-65.
[7]Zaidi H, Ojha N, Morich M, et al. Design and performance evaluation of a whole-body Ingenuity TF PET-MRI system[J]. Phys Med Biol, 2011, 56(10): 3091-3106.
[8]Kitajima K, Suenaga Y, Ueno Y, et al. Fusion of PET and MRI for staging of uterine cervical cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT and pelvic MRI[J]. Clinical Imaging, 2014, 38(4): 464-469.
[9]Sarabhai T, Schaarschmidt BM, Wetter A, et al. Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/MRII and MRI for pre-therapeutic tumor staging of patients with primary cancer of the uterine cervix[J]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2018, 45: 67-76.
[10]Balleyguier C, Sala E, Da Cunha T, et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology[J]. Eur Radiol, 2011, 21(5): 1102-1110.
[11]Bhosale P, Peungjesada S, Devine C, et al. Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging as an Adjunct to Clinical Staging in Cervical Carcinoma[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2010, 34(6): 855-864.
[12]Klerkx WM, Veldhuis WB, Spijkerboer AM, et al. The value of 3.0 Tesla diffusion weighted MRI for pelvic nodal staging in patients with early stage cervical cancer[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2012, 48: 3414-3421.
[13]尚靳，孙洪赞，辛军，等. PET/CT与PET/MRI在诊断宫颈癌原发灶及评价盆腔淋巴结转移的比较研究[J]. 中国医学影像技术，2018，34（1）：94-98.
[14]Gaertner FC, Furst S, Schwaiger M. PET/MRI: a paradigm shift[J]. Cancer Imaging, 2013, 13(1): 36-52.
[15]Exner M, Kühn A, Stumpp P, et al. Value of diffusion-weighted MRI in diagnosis of uterine cervical cancer: a prospective study evaluating the benefits of DWI compared to conventional MR sequences in a 3T environment[J]. Acta Radiol, 2016, 57(7): 869-877.
[16]Khan SR, Rockall AG, Barwick TD. Molecular Imaging in Cervical Cancer[J]. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2016, 60(2): 77-92.
[17]Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: MRI and CT predictors of lymphatic metastases in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 intergroup study[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2009, 112(1): 95-103.
[18]Herrera FG, Prior JO. The role of PET/CT in cervical cancer[J]. Front Oncol, 2013, 3: 34.
[19]Signorelli M, Guerra L, Montanelli L, et al. Preoperative staging of cervical cancer: is 18-FDG-PET/CT really effective in patients with early stage disease?[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2011, 123(2): 236-240.
[20]Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Heubner M, et al. Integrated PET/MRII for whole-body staging of patients with primary cervical cancer: preliminary results[J]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2015, 42(12): 1814-1824.