Cancer Res Treat.  2007 Dec;39(4):165-170.

MR Imaging in Endometrial Carcinoma as a Diagnostic Tool for the Prediction of Myometrial Invasion and Lymph Node Metastasis

• Ryoo UN
• Choi CH
• Yoon JY
• Noh SK
• Kang H
• Kim WY
• Kim BH
• Kim TJ
• Lee JW
• Lee JH
• Kim BG
• Bae DS

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the factors that are associated with the accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for predicting myometrial invasion and lymph node metastasis in women with endometrial carcinoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and preoperative MR imaging reports of 128 women who had pathologically proven endometrial carcinoma. We compared the MR imaging and the histopathology findings.
RESULTS
The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for identifing any myometrial invasion (superficial or deep) were 0.81, 0.61 and 0.74, respectively; these values for deep myometrial invasion were 0.60, 0.94 and 0.86, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of MR imaging for detecting lymph node metastasis were 50.0%, 96.6% and 93.0%, respectively. The patients who were older, had more deliveries and a larger tumor size more frequently had incorrect prediction of deep myometrial invasion (p=0.034, p=0.044, p=0.061, respectively). A higher tumor grade, a histology other than the endometrioid type, myometrial invasion on MR findings and a larger tumor size were associated with a more frequent false-negative prediction of lymph node metastasis (p=0.018, p=0.017, p=0.002, p=0.047, respectively). A larger tumor size was also associated with more frequent false-positive results (p=0.009).
CONCLUSIONS
There are several factors that make accurate assessment of myometrial invasion or lymph node metastasis difficult with using MRI; therefore, the patients with these factors should have their MR findings cautiously interpreted.

Keyword

Endometrial carcinoma; MR imaging; Accuracy

MeSH Terms

Endometrial Neoplasms*
Female
Humans
Lymph Nodes*
Magnetic Resonance Imaging*
Medical Records
Neoplasm Metastasis*
Retrospective Studies
Sensitivity and Specificity

Reference

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Smigal C, et al. Cancer statistics, 2006. CA Cancer J Clin. 2006; 56:106–130. PMID: 16514137.

2. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesley HD, Graham JE, Heller PB. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer. 1987; 60:2035–2041. PMID: 3652025.

3. Piver MS, Lele SB, Barlow JJ, Blumenson L. Paraaortic lymph node evaluation in stage I endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol. 1982; 59:97–100. PMID: 7078856.

4. Hricak H, Rubinstein LV, Gherman GM, Karstaedt N. MR imaging evaluation of endometrial carcinoma: results of an NCI cooperative study. Radiology. 1991; 179:829–832. PMID: 2028000.

5. Sironi S, Taccagni G, Garancini P, Belloni C, DelMaschio A. Myometrial invasion by endometrial carcinoma: assessment by MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992; 158:565–569. PMID: 1738995.

6. Kinkel K, Kaji Y, Yu KK, Segal MR, Lu Y, Powell CB, et al. Radiologic staging in patients with endometrial cancer: a meta-analysis. Radiology. 1999; 212:711–718. PMID: 10478237.

7. Joja I, Asakawa M, Asakawa T, Nakagawa T, Kanazawa S, Kuroda M, et al. Endometrial carcinoma: dynamic MRI with turbo-FLASH technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1996; 20:878–887. PMID: 8933785.

8. Toki T, Oka K, Nakayama K, Oguchi O, Fujii S. A comparative study of pre-operative procedures to assess cervical invasion by endometrial carcinoma. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998; 105:512–516. PMID: 9637120.

9. Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI, Han MC. Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology. 1994; 190:807–811. PMID: 8115631.

10. Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY, Cheung TH, Metreweli C. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000; 175:759–766. PMID: 10954463.

11. Chung HH, Kang SB, Cho JY, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, et al. Accuracy of MR imaging for the prediction of myometrial invasion of endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2007; 104:654–659. PMID: 17095081.

12. Scoutt LM, McCarthy SM, Flynn SD, Lange RC, Long F, Smith RC, et al. Clinical stage I endometrial carcinoma: pitfalls in preoperative assessment with MR imaging. Work in progress. Radiology. 1995; 194:567–572. PMID: 7824739.

13. Hricak H, Stern JL, Fisher MR, Shapeero LG, Winkler ML, Lacey CG. Endometrial carcinoma staging by MR imaging. Radiology. 1987; 162:297–305. PMID: 3797641.

14. Berman ML, Ballon SC, Lagasse LD, Watring WG. Prognosis and treatment of endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980; 136:679–688. PMID: 7355948.

15. DiSaia PJ, Creasman WT, Boronow RC, Blessing JA. Risk factors and recurrent patterns in Stage I endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985; 151:1009–1015. PMID: 3985062.

16. Cowles TA, Magrina JF, Masterson BJ, Capen CV. Comparison of clinical and surgical-staging in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol. 1985; 66:413–416. PMID: 4022500.

17. Boronow RC, Morrow CP, Creasman WT, Disaia PJ, Silverberg SG, Miller A, et al. Surgical staging in endometrial cancer: clinical-pathologic findings of a prospective study. Obstet Gynecol. 1984; 63:825–832. PMID: 6728365.

18. Jobo T, Imai M, Kawaguchi M, Kenmochi M, Kuramoto H. Successful conservative treatment of endometrial carcinoma permitting subsequent pregnancy: report of two cases. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2000; 21:119–122. PMID: 10843466.

19. Kimmig R, Strowitzki T, Muller-Hocker J, Kurzl R, Korell M, Hepp H. Conservative treatment of endometrial cancer permitting subsequent triplet pregnancy. Gynecol Oncol. 1995; 58:255–257. PMID: 7622115.

20. Kowalczyk CL, Malone J Jr, Peterson EP, Jacques SM, Leach RE. Well-differentiated endometrial adenocarcinoma in an infertility patient with later conception. A case report. J Reprod Med. 1999; 44:57–60. PMID: 9987742.

21. Mitsushita J, Toki T, Kato K, Fujii S, Konishi I. Endometrial carcinoma remaining after term pregnancy following conservative treatment with medroxyprogesterone acetate. Gynecol Oncol. 2000; 79:129–132. PMID: 11006045.

22. Nakao Y, Nomiyama M, Kojima K, Matsumoto Y, Yamasaki F, Iwasaka T. Successful pregnancies in 2 infertile patients with endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2004; 58:68–71. PMID: 15103232.

23. Yamashita Y, Mizutani H, Torashima M, Takahashi M, Miyazaki K, Okamura H, et al. Assessment of myometrial invasion by endometrial carcinoma: transvaginal sonography vs contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993; 161:595–599. PMID: 8352114.

24. Lee EJ, Byun JY, Kim BS, Koong SE, Shinn KS. Staging of early endometrial carcinoma: assessment with T2-weighted and gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging. Radiographics. 1999; 19:937–945. PMID: 10464801.