Feasibility of transrectal ultrasonography for assessment of cervical cancer

• Published in: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie Vol. 189; no. 2; pp. 123 - 128
• Main Authors: Schmid, M.P., Pötter, R., Brader, P., Kratochwil, A., Goldner, G., Kirchheiner, K., Sturdza, A., Kirisits, C.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer-Verlag 01.02.2013; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Cervical cancer; Chemoradiotherapy - methods; Feasibility Studies; Female; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Oncology; Original Article; Radiotherapy; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography - methods; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - pathology; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - therapy; Zervixkarzinom; Image-guided adaptive brachytherapy; Transrektaler Ultraschall; Magnetic resonance imaging; Transrectal ultrasonography; Bildgestützte adaptive Brachytherapie; Magnetresonanztomographie; Radiotherapy; Cervical cancer; Strahlentherapie
• ISSN: 0179-7158; 1439-099X
• DOI: 10.1007/s00066-012-0258-1

Purpose To retrospectively compare the maximum target width and target thickness in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in the course of primary radiochemotherapy. Patients and methods T2-weighted MRI and TRUS were performed on patients with locally advanced cervical cancer at the same timepoint—either at the time of diagnosis, or at the time of brachytherapy before or after insertion of the applicator. Patients treated from 2009 to 2011 were selected for this study based on the availability of MRI and TRUS at the defined time points. The target was defined as the complete macroscopic tumor mass and the remaining cervix and was measured on transversal planes. Descriptive statistics and a linear regression analysis were performed for the groups. Results Images from 17 patients were available for analysis. Mean maximum target width was 4.2 ± 0.83 cm and 4.2 ± 0.79 cm for MRI and TRUS, respectively. Mean maximum target thickness was 3.3 ± 1.03 cm and 3.1 ± 1.15 cm for MRI and TRUS, respectively. Linear regression analysis for target width and thickness between TRUS and MRI demonstrated a correlation with R 2  = 0.842 and R 2  = 0.943, respectively. Conclusion The feasibility of TRUS for the assessment of local target extension could be demonstrated. Comparison of the target width and thickness showed a high correlation between TRUS and MRI, indicating the potential of TRUS for target definition in image-guided adaptive brachytherapy.