Study on the value of MRI in locating the internal OS of the cervix and influencing factors.
Fertility preservation
Internal Os of cervix
Localization
Magnetic resonance imaging
Surgery
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Aug 2024
01 Aug 2024
Historique:
received:
10
12
2023
accepted:
26
07
2024
medline:
2
8
2024
pubmed:
2
8
2024
entrez:
1
8
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The position of the internal os of the cervix reported in the literature was inconsistent on MRI images. Additionally, the practical impactful data influencing the internal os located by MRI is limited. We aimed to confirm the position of the internal os of the cervix on MRI images, and the influencing factors locating the the internal os by MRI. A single-center retrospective study was conducted. Data from 175 patients who underwent total hysterectomy for stage I endometrial cancer were collected. The internal os of the cervix is positioned as the starting point for measuring the length of the cervix on MRI images. On dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI), the section formed by the enhancement difference between the uterus and cervix, and on T2-weighted imaging(T2WI), the section formed by the physiological curvature of the uterus and the low signal intensity of the cervical stroma were used as starting points. The results showed no statistically significant difference compared with the removed uterus specimens (p = 0.208, p = 0.571, p = 0.804). A history of cesarean section(p < 0.001), irregular vaginal bleeding for more than three months(p < 0.001), cervical adenomyosis(p = 0.043), and premenopause(p = 0.001) were not conducive to locating the internal os of the cervix by MRI. Our findings provide valuable information and confirm the position of the internal os of the cervix on MRI images, and the several important infuencing factors. We hope that some patients will benefit from our study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39090384
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-68735-7
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-68735-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
17784Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Floyd, J. L. et al. Fertility preservation in women with early-stage gynecologic cancer: Optimizing oncologic and reproductive outcomes. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. 31, 345–351 (2021).
doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001328
pubmed: 32565487
Salib, M. Y. et al. 2018 FIGO staging classification for cervical cancer: Added benefits of imaging. Radiographics 40, 1807–1822 (2020).
doi: 10.1148/rg.2020200013
pubmed: 32946322
Schuurman, T. et al. Fertility-sparing surgery in gynecologic cancer: A systematic review. Cancers (Basel) 13, 1008 (2021).
doi: 10.3390/cancers13051008
pubmed: 33670929
Garzon, S. et al. Fertility-sparing management for endometrial cancer: Review of the literature. Minerva Med. 112, 55–69 (2021).
doi: 10.23736/S0026-4806.20.07072-X
pubmed: 33205638
Nougaret, S. et al. Endometrial cancer MRI staging: Updated guidelines of the european society of urogenital radiology. Eur. Radiol. 29, 792–805 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5515-y
pubmed: 29995239
Lakhman, Y. et al. Stage IB1 cervical cancer: Role of preoperative MR imaging in selection of patients for fertility-sparing radical trachelectomy. Radiology 269, 149–158 (2013).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.13121746
pubmed: 23788721
Bipat, S. et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in determining the proximal extension of early stage cervical cancer to the internal os. Eur. J. Radiol. 78, 60–64 (2011).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.06.006
pubmed: 19576711
Hricak, H. et al. Invasive cervical carcinoma: Comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology 166, 623–631 (1988).
doi: 10.1148/radiology.166.3.3340756
pubmed: 3340756
Sahdev, A. et al. The performance of magnetic resonance imaging in early cervical carcinoma: A long-term experience. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 17, 629–636 (2007).
doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.00829.x
pubmed: 17309561
Peppercorn, P. D. et al. Role of MR imaging in the selection of patients with early cervical carcinoma for fertility-preserving surgery: Initial experience. Radiology 212, 395–399 (1999).
doi: 10.1148/radiology.212.2.r99au01395
pubmed: 10429696
Pecorelli, S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 105, 103–104 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.02.012
pubmed: 19367689
Wendell-Smith, C. P. The lower uterine segment. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Br. Emp. 61, 87–93 (1954).
doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1954.tb07448.x
pubmed: 13131157
Chaemsaithong, P. et al. Uterine artery pulsatility index in the first trimester: Assessment of intersonographer and intersampling site measurement differences. J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal. Med. 31, 2276–2283 (2018).
doi: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1341481
pubmed: 28612629
Pilarczyk, K. Variability of the course of the uterine artery and its branches within the broad ligament and vascularization of uterine walls depending on a woman’s age in light of anatomical, radiologic and microangiographic studies. Ann. Acad. Med. Stetin. 41, 43–55 (1995).
pubmed: 8615552
Conrad, JT. Ueland, K. Physical characteristics of the cervix. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 26,27-36 (1983).
Hoffmann, J. et al. Cesarean section scar in 3 T magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound: Image characteristics and comparison of the methods. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 299, 439–449 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s00404-018-4988-x
pubmed: 30519750
Marotta, M. L. et al. Laparoscopic repair of post-cesarean section uterine scar defects diagnosed in nonpregnant women. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 20, 386–391 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.12.006
pubmed: 23357466
Gala, F. B. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of uterine cervix: A pictorial essay. Indian J. Radiol. Imaging 31, 454–467 (2021).
doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1734377
pubmed: 34556931
pmcid: 8448214
Atalay Mert, S. et al. A rare case of the cervical endometriosis and overview of the literature. Reprod. Sci. 30, 2882–2886 (2023).
doi: 10.1007/s43032-023-01238-4
pubmed: 37079271
Munro, M. G. et al. The two FIGO systems for normal and abnormal uterine bleeding symptoms and classification of causes of abnormal uterine bleeding in the reproductive years: 2018 revisions. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 143, 393–408 (2018).
doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12666
pubmed: 30198563
Dyne, P. L. & Miller, T. A. The patient with non-pregnancy-associated vaginal bleeding. Emerg. Med. Clin. North Am. 37, 153–164 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2019.01.002
pubmed: 30940364
Nelson, H. D. Menopause. Lancet 371, 760–770 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60346-3
pubmed: 18313505
Sosnovski, V. et al. Complex nabothian cysts: A diagnostic dilemma. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 279, 759–761 (2009).
doi: 10.1007/s00404-008-0801-6
pubmed: 18807055
Berek, J. S. et al. Endometrial cancer staging subcommittee, FIGO women’s cancer committee. FIGO staging of endometrial cancer: 2023. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 162, 383–394 (2023).
doi: 10.1002/ijgo.14923
pubmed: 37337978
Wang, C. B. et al. Cesarean scar defect: Correlation between cesarean section number, defect size, clinical symptoms and uterine position. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 34, 85–89 (2009).
doi: 10.1002/uog.6405
pubmed: 19565535
Nizić, D. et al. Flexion and version of the uterus on pelvic ultrasound examination. Acta Med. Croatica. 68, 311–315 (2014).
pubmed: 26016224