THE VALUE OF 1.5 TESLA MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING IN DIAGNOSING EARLY-STAGE CERVICAL CANCER AFTER RADICAL SURGERY AT K HOSPITAL
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: The study aims to evaluate the value of 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing early-stage cervical cancer (CC) in patients who underwent radical surgery at K Hospital. Subjects and Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on 106 patients with cervical tumors classified as early-stage based on MRI, who underwent radical surgery and had postoperative pathological results from January 2024 to December 2024 at K Hospital. Results: In early-stage cervical cancer (UT CTC), MRI has high value in diagnosing vaginal invasion of the upper 2/3 with sensitivity (Se) = 87,5%, specificity (Sp) = 97,9%, accuracy (Acc) = 97,1%, positive predictive value (PPV) = 77,8%, and negative predictive value (NPV) = 98,9%. MRI also shows 100% accuracy and negative predictive value for diagnosing invasion into the lower 1/3 of the vagina, pelvic sidewall, ureters, bladder, and rectum. For diagnosing pelvic lymph node metastasis, MRI demonstrates 94,3% accuracy and NPV. Regarding early-stage cervical cancer staging, MRI shows an accuracy of 90,1% for stage IB1, 93,9% for stage IB2, and 85,7% for stage IIA1. The overall accuracy is 87,7%. Conclusion: MRI is highly valuable in diagnosing assessing invasion and determining pelvic lymph node metastasis in cervical cancer patients. It plays an essential role in accurate early-stage cervical cancer staging and helps in devising the most appropriate treatment plan for patients.
Article Details
Keywords
Early-stage cervical cancer, cervical tumor MRI.
References
2. Hricak H, Akin O, Sala E et al. Gynecology. In: Diagnostic Imaging. 1st ed. AMIRSYS; 2007:16-22.
3. Trần Lệ Quyên. Đặc điểm hình ảnh và giá trị của cộng hưởng từ 1.5T trong phân loại giai đoạn ung thư cổ tử cung, Trường Đại học Y Hà Nội, 2022.
4. Charis Bourgioti et al. Current imaging strategies for the evaluation of uterine cervical cancer. World journal of radiology. 2016;8(4):342-354.
5. Sala E, Rockall AG, Freeman SJ, Mitchell DG Reinhold C. The added role of MR imaging in treatment stratification of patients with gynecologic malignancies: What the radiologist needs to know. Radiology. 2013;266(3):717-740.
6. Wei TY, Wynnie WML, Mei YY et al (2000) Comparison Of Dynamic Helial CT And Dynamic MR Imaging Evaluation of Pelvic Lymph Nodes in Cervical Carcinoma AJR, Vol 175, Iss3.
7. Okamoto Y, Tanaka YO, Nishida M, Tsunoda H, Yoshikawa H, Itai Y. MR imaging of the uterine cervix: imaging-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2003;23(2):425-445.
8. Scheidier J, Heuck AF (2002). Imaging of cancer of the cervix. Radiol Clin North Am; 40(3): 577-590.
9. Ascher SM, Takahama J, Jha RC (2001). Staging of gynecologie malignancies. Top Magn Reson Imaging; 12(2):105-129.