S. Postema et al., Effect of MRI on therapeutic decisions in invasive cervical carcinoma - Direct comparison with the pelvic examination as a preoperative test, GYNECOL ONC, 79(3), 2000, pp. 485-489
Objectives. Our aim was to compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with th
e current standard clinical practice (pelvic examination including general
anesthesia in selected patients) with regard to treatment planning in invas
ive cervical carcinoma. It was of particular interest to compare the accura
cy of both methods for allocating the patients to the appropriate treatment
modality: surgery versus primary radiotherapy.
Methods. One hundred and three consecutive patients with primary invasive c
ervical carcinoma underwent both MRI at 1.5 T and pelvic examination. The g
old standard for comparing treatment decisions was based on the surgico-pat
hologic data: tumor confined to the cervix (treatment decision for surgery)
or extracervical tumor spread (treatment decision for primary radiotherapy
).
Results. A gold standard was available in 91 patients. The pelvic examinati
on made correct treatment decisions in 89% of patients. However, the sensit
ivity for extracervical spread was only 44% (8/18 patients). MRI was better
at identifying extracervical tumor spread: 67 and 89% for observers 1 and
2, respectively. MRI, however, had more false positive results and correct
treatment decisions were made in 69-84% of patients (observer 1, 76/91; obs
erver 2, 63/91).
Conclusion. Treatment decisions based on the pelvic examination were correc
t in 89%, with MRI not bringing improvement. MRI, however, is better in dia
gnosing extracervical spread, but at the cost of more false positives. (C)
2000 Academic Press.