Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Uterine cervical carcinoma: a comparison of two- and three-dimensional T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging at 3.0 T for image quality and local-regional staging

  • Urogenital
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To compare three-dimensional (3D) T2-weighted turbo spin-echo (TSE) with multiplanar two-dimensional (2D) T2-weighted TSE for the evaluation of invasive cervical carcinoma.

Methods

Seventy-five patients with cervical carcinoma underwent MRI of the pelvis at 3.0 T, using both 5-mm-thick multiplanar 2D (total acquisition time = 12 min 25 s) and 1-mm-thick coronal 3D T2-weighted TSE sequences (7 min 20 s). Quantitative analysis of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and qualitative analysis of image quality were performed. Local-regional staging was performed in 45 patients who underwent radical hysterectomy.

Results

The estimated SNR of cervical carcinoma and the relative tumour contrast were significantly higher on 3D imaging (P < 0.0001). Tumour conspicuity was better with the 3D sequence, but the sharpness of tumour margin was better with the 2D sequence. No significant difference in overall image quality was noted between the two sequences (P = 0.38). There were no significant differences in terms of the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of parametrial invasion, vaginal invasion, and lymph node metastases.

Conclusion

Multiplanar reconstruction 3D T2-weighted imaging is largely equivalent to 2D T2-weighted imaging for overall image quality and staging accuracy of cervical carcinoma with a shorter MR data acquisition, but has limitations with regard to the sharpness of the tumour margin.

Key Points

• 3D T2-weighted MR sequence is equivalent to 2D for cervical carcinoma staging.

• Coronal 3D acquisitions can reduce the examination time.

• SNR and relative tumour conspicuity were significantly higher on 3D sequences.

• Reformatted 3D T2-weighted imaging had limitations in sharpness of tumour margin.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Engin G (2006) Cervical cancer: MR imaging findings before, during, and after radiation therapy. Eur Radiol 16:313–324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Merkle EM, Dale BM, Paulson EK (2006) Abdominal MR imaging at 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 14:17–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Norris DG (2003) High field human imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 18:519–529

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Uematsu H, Dougherty L, Takahashi M et al (2003) Abdominal imaging at 4 T MR system: a preliminary result. Eur J Radiol 47:161–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Uematsu H, Takahashi M, Dougherty L, Hatabu H (2004) High field body MR imaging: preliminary experiences. Clin Imaging 28:159–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Martin DR, Friel HT, Danrad R, De Becker J, Hussain SM (2005) Approach to abdominal imaging at 1.5 Tesla and optimization at 3 Tesla. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 13:241–254, v-vi

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pruessmann KP (2004) Parallel imaging at high field strength: synergies and joint potential. Top Magn Reson Imaging 15:237–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lichy MP, Wietek BM, Mugler JP 3rd et al (2005) Magnetic resonance imaging of the body trunk using a single-slab, 3-dimensional, T2-weighted turbo-spin-echo sequence with high sampling efficiency (SPACE) for high spatial resolution imaging: initial clinical experiences. Invest Radiol 40:754–760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Meindl T, Wirth S, Weckbach S, Dietrich O, Reiser M, Schoenberg SO (2009) Magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine: comparison of 2D T2-weighted turbo spin echo, 2D T2*weighted gradient-recalled echo and 3D T2-weighted variable flip-angle turbo spin echo sequences. Eur Radiol 19:713–721

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Rosenkrantz AB, Neil J, Kong X et al (2010) Prostate cancer: comparison of 3D T2-weighted with conventional 2D T2-weighted imaging for image quality and tumor detection. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:446–452

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rosenkrantz AB, Patel JM, Babb JS, Storey P, Hecht EM (2010) Liver MRI at 3 T using a respiratory-triggered time-efficient 3D T2-weighted technique: impact on artifacts and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:634–641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ristow O, Steinbach L, Sabo G et al (2009) Isotropic 3D fast spin-echo imaging versus standard 2D imaging at 3.0 T of the knee–image quality and diagnostic performance. Eur Radiol 19:1263–1272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Futterer JJ, Yakar D, Strijk SP, Barentsz JO (2008) Preoperative 3T MR imaging of rectal cancer: local staging accuracy using a two-dimensional and three-dimensional T2-weighted turbo spin echo sequence. Eur J Radiol 65:66–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim H, Lim JS, Choi JY et al (2010) Rectal cancer: comparison of accuracy of local-regional staging with two- and three-dimensional preoperative 3.0T MR imaging. Radiology 254:485–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Agrawal G, Riherd JM, Busse RF, Hinshaw JL, Sadowski EA (2009) Evaluation of uterine anomalies: 3D FRFSE cube versus standard 2D FRFSE. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:W558–W562

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hecht EM, Yitta S, Lim RP et al (2011) Preliminary clinical experience at 3 T with a 3D T2-weighted sequence compared with multiplanar 2D for evaluation of the female pelvis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:W346–W352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Proscia N, Jaffe TA, Neville AM, Wang CL, Dale BM, Merkle EM (2010) MRI of the pelvis in women: 3D versus 2D T2-weighted technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:254–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hori M, Kim T, Onishi H et al (2011) Uterine tumors: comparison of 3D versus 2D T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging at 3.0 T–initial experience. Radiology 258:154–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pecorelli S (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105:103–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Coakley FV et al (2007) Early invasive cervical cancer: CT and MR imaging in preoperative evaluation - ACRIN/GOG comparative study of diagnostic performance and interobserver variability. Radiology 245:491–498

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sodickson A, Mortele KJ, Barish MA, Zou KH, Thibodeau S, Tempany CM (2006) Three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo MRCP: comparison with two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 238:549–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Choi SH, Kim SH, Choi HJ, Park BK, Lee HJ (2004) Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: results of prospective study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 28:620–627

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Selman TJ, Mann C, Zamora J, Appleyard TL, Khan K (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of tests for lymph node status in primary cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ 178:855–862

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Sagoh T et al (1989) Carcinoma of the cervix: staging with MR imaging. Radiology 171:245–251

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Fujiwara K, Yoden E, Asakawa T et al (2000) Negative MRI findings with invasive cervical biopsy may indicate stage IA cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 79:451–456

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Y. R. Shin

    Present address: Department of Radiology, Incheon St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Bupyeong 6-dong, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, 403-720, Republic of Korea

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 137-701, Republic of Korea

    Y. R. Shin, S. E. Rha, B. G. Choi, S. N. Oh, M. Y. Park & J. Y. Byun

Authors
  1. Y. R. Shin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. E. Rha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. G. Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. N. Oh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Y. Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. Y. Byun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. E. Rha.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shin, Y.R., Rha, S.E., Choi, B.G. et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: a comparison of two- and three-dimensional T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging at 3.0 T for image quality and local-regional staging. Eur Radiol 23, 1150–1157 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2603-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2603-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation