Impact of MRI in the management and staging of cancer of the uterine cervix

References

• Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:74–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergström R, Sparén P, Adami HO. Trends in cancer of the cervix uteri in Sweden following cytological screening. Br J Cancer 1999;81:159–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cancer Incidence in Sweden 2007. Health and Diseases. The National Board of Health and Welfare; Stockhalm. 2008; 11.
   Google Scholar
• Benedet JL, Bender H, Jones H 3rd, Ngan HY, Pecorelli S. FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecological cancers. FIGO committee on gynecologic oncology. Int J Gynecol Obst 2000 Aug;70(2):209–62.
   Google Scholar
• Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin BU, Creasman WT, Major F. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 1990;38:352–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedullà F, Centurioni MG, Foglia G, Ferrari I, Orsatti M, Vitale V, . Treatment of FIGO stage Ib cervical carcinoma with nodal involvement. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1994;15:59–64.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tinga DJ, Timmer PR, Bouma J, Aalders JG. Prognostic significance of single versus multiple lymph node metastases in cervical carcinoma stage IB. Gynecol Oncol 1990;39: 175–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chung HH, Kang SB, Cho JY, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, . Can preoperative MRI accurately evaluate nodal and parametrial invasion in early stage cervical cancer? Jpn J Clin Oncol 2007;37:370–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Choi SH, Kim SH, Choi HJ, Park BK, Lee HJ. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: Results of a prospective study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004;28:620–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bipat S, Glas AS, van der Velden J, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of uterine cervical carcinoma: A systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 2003;91:59–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vidaurreta J, Bermúdez A, di Paola G, Sardi J. Laparoscopic staging in locally advanced cervical carcinoma: A new possible philosophy? Gynecol Oncol 1999;75:366–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lagasse LD, Creasman WT, Shingleton HM, Ford JH, Blessing JA. Results and complications of operative staging in cervical cancer: Experience of the Gynecology Oncology Group. Gynecol Oncol 1980;9:90–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaPolla JP, Schlaerth JB, Gaddis O, Morrow CP. The influence of surgical staging on the evaluation and treatment of patients with cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1986; 24:194–206.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, Reinhold C, Thomas G, Amendola M, . Early invasive cervical cancer: Tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:5687–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Nagell JR Jr, Roddick JW Jr, Lowin DM. The staging of cervical cancer: Inevitable discrepancies between clinical staging and pathologic findings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1971;110:973–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG. Invasive cervical carcinoma: Comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology 1988;166:623–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB. Cervical carcinoma: Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:43–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höckel M. Ultra-radical compartmentalized surgery in gynaecological oncology. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006;32:859–65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Chi DS, Amendola MA, Brandt K, Schwartz LH, . Role of imaging in pretreatment evaluation of early invasive cervical cancer: Results of the intergroup study American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6651 – Gynecologic Oncology Group 183. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:9329–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amendola MA, Hricak H, Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Chi DS, Long HJ III, . Utilization of diagnostic studies in the pretreatment evaluation of invasive cervical cancer in the United States: Results of Intergroup Protocol ACRIN 6651/GOG 183. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7454–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Narayan K. Arguments for a magnetic resonance imaging-assisted FIGO staging system for cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2005;15:573–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Whitney CW, Stehman FB. The abandoned radical hysterectomy: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol 2000;79:350–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar