Download PDF
Zentralbl Gynakol 2006; 128(2): 60-67
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-921336
Übersicht

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Magnetresonanztomographie (MRT) des Beckens in der Diagnostik des Zervixkarzinoms - Eine Übersichtsarbeit

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of the Pelvis in the Diagnosis of Cervical Carcinoma - ReviewE. A. M. Hauth1 , R. Kimmig2 , M. Forsting1
  • 1Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsklinikum Essen
  • 2Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Essen
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
27 April 2006 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Magnetresonanztomographie (MRT) des Beckens stellt ein zuverlässiges diagnostisches Verfahren in der Stadieneinteilung des Zervixkarzinoms vor Therapieentscheidung und in der Rezidivdiagnostik des Zervixkarzinoms dar. Die vorliegende Übersichtsarbeit beschreibt die Vorteile und Grenzen der MRT in der Diagnostik des Zervixkarzinoms. Die verschiedenen Tumorstadien werden an Bildbeispielen erläutert.

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an accepted imaging method for diagnosing cervical cancer staging before therapy and for recurrent cervical carcinoma. This review article describes the usefulness and the limits of MRI in the diagnosis of cervical cancer. Typical manifestations are illustrated with sample images.

Schlüsselwörter

MRT des Beckens - Zervixkarzinom

Key words

MRI of the pelvis - cervical carcinoma

Literatur

  • 1 Landis S H, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo P A. Cancer statistics.  CA Cancer J Clin. 1998;  48 6-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Liu P F, Krestin G P, Huch R A, Gohde S C, Caduff R F, Debatin J F. MRI of the uterus, uterine cervix, and vagina: diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced fast multiplanar gradient-echo imaging in comparison with fast spin-echo T2-weighted pulse imaging.  Eur Radiol. 1998;  8 1433-1440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hamm B, Kubik-Huch R A, Fleige B. MR imaging and CT of the female pelvis: radiologic-pathologic correlation.  Eur Radiol. 1999;  9 3-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Arbeitsgemeinschaft der wissenschaftlichen medizinischen Fachgesellschaften .Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft e. V. (DKG) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG): Diagnostik und Therapie des Zervixkarzinoms. AWMF-Leinilinienregister Nr. 032/033, März 2003, Entwicklungsstufe 2: 1-31
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Michniewicz K ., Oellinger J. Bildgebende Diagnostik beim invasiven Zervixkarzinom: MRT, CT und Ultraschall.  Zentralbl Gynakol. 2001;  123 222-228
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kubik-Huch R A. Female pelvis. Review article.  European Radiology. 1999;  9 1715-1721
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Forstner R, Graf A. Bildgebende Diagnostik im Staging gynäkologischer Karzinome.  Radiologe. 1999;  39 610-618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Boss E A, Barnetsz J O, Massuger L FAG, Boonstra H. The role of MR imaging in invasive cercival carcinoma.  Eur Radiol. 2000;  10 256-370
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Scheidler J, Heuck A, Wencke K, Kimmig R, Müller-Lisse U, Reiser M. Parametrane Infiltration beim Zervixkarzinom: Diagnostische Wertigkeit von kontrastverstärkten fettsupprimierten T1-gewichteten Se-Sequenzen bei 1,5 Tesla.  Fortschr Röntgenstr. 1997;  166 312-316
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Higgins C B, Hricak H, Helms C A. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the body. Third Edition. Lippincott-Raven Press, New York 1997; Chapter 31; 816-844
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Hamm B, Krestin G P, Laniado M, Nicolas V. MRT von Abdomen und Becken. Kapitel 11: Uterus und Vagina. Stuttgart, Thieme 1999; 221-263
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Togashi K, Morikawa K, Kataoka M, Konishi J. Cervical cancer.  J Magn Reson Imaging. 1998;  8 391-397
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hauth E A, Stattaus J, Debatin J F, Ruehm S G. Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of benign and malignant pelvic tumors.  Rofo. 2004;  176 817-828
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ozsarlak O, Tjalma W, Schepens E, Corthouts B, Op de Beeck B, Van Marck E, Parizel P M, De Schepper A M. The correlation of preoperative CT, MR imaging, and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings in primary cervical carcinoma.  Eur Radiol. 2003;  13 2338-2345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Choi S H, Kim S H, Choi H J, Park B K, Lee H J. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: results of prospective study.  J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2004;  28 620-627
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Nicolet V, Carignan L, Bourdon F, Prosmanne O. MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach.  Radiographics. 2000;  20 1539-1549
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Tsuda K, Murakami T, Kurachi H. et al . MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: comparison among T2-weighted, dynamic, and postcontrast T1-weighted images with histopathological correlation.  Abdom Imaging. 1997;  22 103-107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Seki H, Azumi R, Kimura M, Sakai K. Stromal invasion by carcinoma of the cervix: assessment with dynamic MR imaging.  AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;  168 1579-1585
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Vierzen P BJ, Massuger L FAG, Ruys S HJ, Barentsz J O. Fast dynamic contrast enhanced MR imaging of cervical carcinoma.  Clin Radiol. 1998;  53 183-192
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Scheidler J, Heuck A F. Imaging of cancer of the cervix.  Radiol Clin N Am. 2002;  40 577-590
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Hricak H, Lacey C G, Sandles L G, Chan Y C, Winkler M L, Stern J L. Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MRI and surgical findings.  Radiology. 1988;  166 623-631
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kim S H, Choi B I, Han J K, Kim H D, Lee H P, Kang S B. Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MRI in 99 patients.  J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993;  17 633-640
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kim S H, Choi B I, Lee H P, Kang S B, Choi Y M, Han M C. et al . Uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MR findings.  Radiology. 1990;  175 45-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Reinhold C, Gallix B P, Ascher S M. Uterus and cervix. In: Semelka RC, Ascher SM, Reinhold C (eds). MRI of the abdomen and pelvis: a text atlas. Willey-Liss, New York, NY 1997; 585-660
    Google Scholar
  • 25 McCarthy S, Hricak H. The uterus and vagina. In: Higgins CB, Hricak H, Helms CA (eds). Magnetic resonance imaging of the body. 3rd ed. Lippincott-Raven, New York, NY 1997; 761-814
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Kim S H, Han M C. Invasion of the urinary bladder by uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation with MR imaging.  AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;  168 393-397
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Scheidler J, Heuck A F, Steinborn M. et al . Parametrial invasion in cervical carcinoma. Evaluation of detection at MR imaging with fat suppression.  Radiology. 1998;  206 125-129
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Williams A D, Cousins C, Soutter W P. et al . Detection of pelvic lymph node metastases in gynaecologic malignancy.  Am J Roentgenol. 2001;  177 343-348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kim S H, Kim S C, Choi B I, Han M C. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MRI.  Radiology. 1994;  190 807-811
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 McCauley T R, Rifkin M D, Ledet C A. Pelvic lymph node visualization with MR imaging using local administration of ultra-small superparamagnetic iron oxide contrast.  J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;  4 492-497
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Yamashita Y, Baba T, Baba Y, Nishimura R, Ikeda S. et al . Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of uterine cervical cancer: Pharmakokinetic analysis with histopathgologic correlation and its importance in predicting the outcome of radiation therapy.  Radiology. 2000;  215 803-809
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Sugimura K, Okizuka H. Postsurgical pelvis: treatment follow-up.  Radiol Clin N Am. 2002;  40 659-680
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Jeong Y Y, Kang H K, Chung T W, Seo J J, Park J G. Uterine cervical carcinoma after therapy: CT and MR imaging findings.  RadioGraphics. 2003;  23 969-981
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Thompson J D. Hysterectomie. In: Thompson JD, Rock JA (eds). The Lind's operative gynecology. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia, PA 1992; 663-738
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Fulcher A S, O'Sullivan S G, Segreti E M, Kavanagh B D. Recurrent cervical carcinoma: typical and atypical manifestations.  Radiographics. 1999;  19 103-116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Larson D M, Copeland I J, Stringer C A, Gershenson D M, Malone J M, Edwards C L. Recurrent cervical carcinoma after radical hysterectomy.  Gynecol Incol. 1988;  30 381-387
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Kinkel K, Ariche M, Tardivon A A. et al . Differentiation between recurrent tumor and benign conditions after treatment of gynecologic pelvic carcinoma: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging.  Radiology. 1997;  204 55-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Yamashita Y, Harada M, Torashima M. et al . Dynamic MR imaging of recurrent postoperative cervical cancer.  J Magn Reson Imaging. 1996;  6 167-171
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Unterweger M, Kubik-Huch R A. Weibliches Becken. In: Rummeny EJ, Reimer R, Heidel W. Gankörper-MR-Tomographie. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, New-York 2002; 402-427
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Kawanagh B D, Gieschen H I, Schmidt-Ullrich R K. et al . A pilot study of concomitant boost accelerated superfractionated radiotherapy for stage III cancer of the uterine cervix.  In J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997;  38 561-568
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Beckmann M W, Mehlhorn G, Thiel F, Breuel C, Fasching P A, Ackermann S. Therapiefortschritte beim primären Zervixkarzinom.  Dt Ärztebl. 2005;  102 979-986
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Yang W T, Man Lam W W, Yu M Y. et al . Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma.  Am J Roentgenol. 2000;  175 759-766
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Wittekind C, Meyer H JK, Bootz F. TNM 6. Auflage UICC. TNM-Klassifikation maligner Tumoren. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Schneider A, Hertel H. Surgical and radiographic staging in patients with cervical cancer.  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2004;  16 11-18
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Oellinger J J, Blohmer J U, Michniewicz K, Siewert C, Wust P, Gutberlet M, Lichtenegger W, Felix R. Pre-operative staging of cervical cancer: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) with histologic results.  Zentralbl Gynakol.. 2000;  122 82-91
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 De Souza N M, Whittle M, Williams A D, Sohail M, Krausz T, Gilderale D J. et al . Magnetic resonance imaging of the primary site in stage I cervical carcinoma: A comparison of endovaginal coil with external phased array coil techniques at 0.5 T.  J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;  12 1020-1026
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Dr. med. Elke A. M. Hauth

Universitätsklinikum Essen · Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie und Neuroradiologie

Hufelandstr. 550

45147 Essen

Phone: 02 01/7 23 35 78

Fax: 02 01/7 23 20 77

Email: elke.hauth@uni-essen.de