Abstract OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing the reliability of diagnostic fluid hysteroscopy, transvaginal sonography (TVS), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to assess pre-operatively the presence of cervical involvement by endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: Cervical involvement was assessed by diagnostic fluid mini-hysteroscopy, TVS and MRI before surgery in 100 patients with histological diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma. Results were compared with pathological examination on surgical specimen. The sensitivity, the specificity, the positive and negative predictive values, the accuracy, the positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR) of the three techniques for recognizing the cervical involvement by the carcinoma were calculated. RESULTS: At histology cervical involvement was found in 15 cases. Compared to TVS and MRI, hysteroscopy showed the highest sensitivity (0.53, 0.67 and 0.93, respectively). The specificity of MRI was significantly higher than both hysteroscopy and TVS (0.95, 0.88 and 0.82, respectively). The diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopy (0.89) and MRI (0.91) was similar and significantly higher than TVS (0.78). The LR for a positive result of MRI was 14.16, that was 2.08 and 4.68 times higher than that of hysteroscopy and TVS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study demonstrates that in women with endometrial carcinoma the exclusion of cervical canal involvement at hysteroscopy is more reliable than at MRI and TVS while MRI is the most reliable technique for predicting cervical involvement. In the pre-surgical work-up of patients affected by endometrial carcinoma hysteroscopy and MRI are both useful for staging and planning the correct surgical strategy.

Reliability of diagnostic fluid hysteroscopy in the assessment of cervical invasion by endometrial carcinoma:a a comparative study with transvaginal sonography and MRI

CICINELLI, Ettore;MARINACCIO, Marco;PINTO, Vincenzo
2008

Abstract

Abstract OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at comparing the reliability of diagnostic fluid hysteroscopy, transvaginal sonography (TVS), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to assess pre-operatively the presence of cervical involvement by endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: Cervical involvement was assessed by diagnostic fluid mini-hysteroscopy, TVS and MRI before surgery in 100 patients with histological diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma. Results were compared with pathological examination on surgical specimen. The sensitivity, the specificity, the positive and negative predictive values, the accuracy, the positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR) of the three techniques for recognizing the cervical involvement by the carcinoma were calculated. RESULTS: At histology cervical involvement was found in 15 cases. Compared to TVS and MRI, hysteroscopy showed the highest sensitivity (0.53, 0.67 and 0.93, respectively). The specificity of MRI was significantly higher than both hysteroscopy and TVS (0.95, 0.88 and 0.82, respectively). The diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopy (0.89) and MRI (0.91) was similar and significantly higher than TVS (0.78). The LR for a positive result of MRI was 14.16, that was 2.08 and 4.68 times higher than that of hysteroscopy and TVS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study demonstrates that in women with endometrial carcinoma the exclusion of cervical canal involvement at hysteroscopy is more reliable than at MRI and TVS while MRI is the most reliable technique for predicting cervical involvement. In the pre-surgical work-up of patients affected by endometrial carcinoma hysteroscopy and MRI are both useful for staging and planning the correct surgical strategy.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11586/132388
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 32
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 26
social impact