European Journal of Cancer
Volume 41, Issue 14 , Pages 2086-2092 , September 2005

Role of positron emission tomography in pretreatment lymph node staging of uterine cervical cancer: A prospective surgicopathologic correlation study

Received 20 January 2005 ,Revised 17 May 2005 ,Accepted 18 May 2005.

References 

  1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al. Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer. 2001;94:153–156
  2. Averette HE, Dudan RC, Ford JH. Exploratory celiotomy for surgical staging of cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1972;113:1090–1096
  3. Takeshima N, Yanoh K, Tabata T, et al. Assessment of the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging for early invasive squamous cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;74:165–169
  4. Lagasse LD, Creasman WT, Shingleton HM, et al. Results and complications of operative staging in cervical cancer: experience of the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Gynecol Oncol. 1980;9:90–98
  5. Kupets R, Covens A. Is the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for cervical carcinoma able to predict survival in patients with cervical carcinoma? An assessment of clinimetric properties. Cancer. 2001;92:796–804
  6. Yu KK, Forstner R, Hricak H. Cervical carcinoma: role of imaging. Abdom Imag. 1997;22:208–215
  7. Scheidler J, Hricak H, Yu KK, et al. Radiological evaluation of lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 1997;278:1096–1101
  8. Rose PG, Adler LP, Rodriguez M, et al. Positron emission tomography for evaluating para-aortic nodal metastasis in locally advanced cervical cancer before staging: a surgicopathologic study. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:41–45
  9. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D, et al. Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology. 2001;218:776–782
  10. Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA. FDG-PET evaluation of carcinoma of the cervix. Clin Positron Imag. 1999;2:105–109
  11. La Polla JP, Schlaerth JB, Gaddis O, et al. The influence of surgical staging on evaluation and treatment of patients with cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1986;24:194–206
  12. Berman ML, Lagasse L, Watring W, et al. The operative evaluation of patients with cervical carcinoma by an extraperitoneal approach. Obstet Gynecol. 1977;50:658–664
  13. Possover M, Krause N, Kuhne-Heid R, et al. Value of laparoscopic evaluation of paraaortic and pelvic lymph nodes for treatment of cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;178:806–810
  14. Vidaurreta J, Bermudez A, di Paola G, et al. Laparoscopic staging in locally advanced cervical carcinoma: a new possible philosophy?. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;75:366–371
  15. Kim SC, Choi BI, Han MC. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology. 1994;190:807–811
  16. Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, Beyer T, et al. Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET-CT scanner. Med Phys. 1998;25:2046–2053
  17. Lin WC, Hung YC, Yeh LS, et al. Usefulness of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to detect para-aortic lymph nodal metastases in advanced cervical cancer with negative computed tomography findings. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;89:73–76
  18. Belhocine T, Thille A, Fridman V, et al. Contribution of whole-body 18FDG PET imaging in the management of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;87:90–97
  19. Winter R, Petru E, Haas J. Pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in cervical cancer. In: Burghardt E, Monaghna J, editors. Operative Treatment of Cervical Cancer. London, 1989, 857.
  20. Panici PB, Scambia G, Baiocchi G, et al. Anatomical study of para-aortic and pelvic lymph nodes in gynecologic malignancies. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79:498–502
  21. Stehman FB, Bundy BN, DiSaia PJ, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix treated with irradiation therapy: I. A multivariate analysis of prognostic variables in the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Cancer. 1991;67:2776–2785
  22. Alvarez RD, Potter ME, Soong SJ, et al. Rationale for using pathologic tumor dimensions and nodal status to subclassify surgically treated stage IB cervical cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol. 1991;43:108–112
  23. Averette HE, Nguyen HN, Donato DM, et al. Radical hysterectomy for invasive cervical cancer: a 25-year prospective experience with the Miami technique. Cancer. 1993;71:1422–1437
  24. Haie C, Pejovic MH, Gerbaulet A, et al. Is prophylactic para-aortic irradiation worthwhile in the treatment of advanced cervical carcinoma? Results of a controlled clinical trial of the EORTC radiotherapy group. Radiother Oncol. 1988;11:101–112
  25. Rotman M, Pajak TF, Choi K, et al. Prophylactic extended-field irradiation of para-aortic lymph nodes in stages IIB and bulky IB and IIA cervical carcinomas. Ten-year treatment results of RTOG 79-20. JAMA. 1995;274:387–393
  26. Piver MS, Barlow JJ, Krishnamsetty R. Five-year survival with no evidence of disease in patients with biopsy-confirmed aortic node metastasis from cervical carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1981;139:575–578
  27. Kim PY, Monk BJ, Chabra S, et al. Cervical cancer with paraaortic metastases: significance of residual paraaortic disease after surgical staging. Gynecol Oncol. 1998;69:243–247
  28. Cosin JA, Fowler JM, Chen MD, et al. Pretreatment surgical staging of patients with cervical carcinoma. The case for lymph node debulking. Cancer. 1998;82:2241–2248
  29. Lai CH, Huang KG, Hong JH, et al. Randomized trial of surgical staging (extraperitoneal or laparoscopic) versus clinical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;89:160–167
  30. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2500–2507

PII: S0959-8049(05)00554-X

doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2005.05.013

European Journal of Cancer
Volume 41, Issue 14 , Pages 2086-2092 , September 2005

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution