Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak (michal.masternak@ucf.edu) for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 20, Number 3, 2015

Local experience in cervical cancer imaging: Comparison in tumour assessment between TRUS and MRI

Claudia Ordeanu, Diana Cristina Pop, Radu Badea, Csaba Csutak, Nicolae Todor, Calin Ordeanu, Reka Kerekes, Ovidiu Coza, Viorica Nagy, Patriciu Achimas-Cadariu, Alexandru Irimie

Summary:

Objective

The aim of study was to analyze the accuracy of TRUS (transrectal ultrasound) vs. MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and clinical gynecological examination estimation in the evaluation of tumor dimensions.

Methods

The patients inclusion criterion included primarily pathologically squamous cell carcinoma, but excluded were patients who had not undergone BT (brachytherapy) and treated with palliative intent. We offer two types of treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer: (a) radiochemotherapy followed by surgery and (b) exclusive radiochemotherapy. Imaging tests follow the presence of tumor and tumor size (width and thickness). Each examination was performed by a different physician who had no knowledge of the others’ findings. All patients underwent MRI prior to EBRT (external beam radiation therapy) while 18 of them also at the time of the first brachytherapy application. For the analysis we used the r-Pearson correlation coefficient.

Results

In 2013, 26 patients with cervical cancer were included. A total of 44 gynecological examinations were performed, 44 MRIs and 18 TRUSs. For the comparisons prior to EBRT the correlation coefficient between TRUS vs. MRI was r = 0.79 for AP and r = 0.83 for LL, for GYN vs. MRI was r = 0.6 for AP and r = 0.75 for LL. Prior to BT for GYN vs. MRI, r values were 0.60 and 0.63 for AP and LL, respectively; for GYN vs. TRUS, r values were 0.56 and 0.78 for AP and LL, respectively.

Conclusions

A high correlation between the three examinations was obtained. As such, TRUS can be considered a suitable method in the evaluation of tumor dimensions.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2015; 20(3) : 223-230


« back

 
INDEXED IN:

Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/15071367/19/2