Limited utility of subendometrial enhancement in assessing the interface between the endometrium and myometrium.
Contrast media
Endometrial neoplasm
Female genitalia
Magnetic resonance imaging
Uterus
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 10 2024
14 10 2024
Historique:
received:
17
07
2024
accepted:
30
09
2024
medline:
15
10
2024
pubmed:
15
10
2024
entrez:
14
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study was conducted to re-evaluate the utility of subendometrial enhancement (SEE) in assessing the interface between the endometrium and myometrium. In total, 110 women who underwent pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for non-endometrial gynecologic diseases were enrolled in this prospective study. Two radiologists independently assessed the presence or absence of subendometrial enhancement (SEE) on dynamic contrast-enhanced (CE) MRI. A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of menstrual status on the detection of SEE. Identified areas of SEE were rated using a 4-point Likert scale to determine their reliability in assessing the interface between the endometrium and myometrium. SEE was identified in 44.5% (49/110) of cases by radiologist 1 and in 39.1% (43/110) by radiologist 2. A subgroup analysis indicated no significant differences in the detection of SEE based on menstrual status. The identified areas of SEE were deemed reliable for assessing the interface between the endometrium and myometrium in 24.5% (12/49) of the cases evaluated by radiologist 1 and in 32.6% (14/43) of those evaluated by radiologist 2. Among the 110 women studied, reliable areas of SEE for assessing the interface between the endometrium and myometrium were observed in 10.9% (n = 12) by radiologist 1 and 12.7% (n = 14) by radiologist 2. The evaluation of SEE using dynamic CE MRI may be limited in its ability to assess the interface between the endometrium and myometrium.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39402160
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-74752-3
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-74752-3
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
23978Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Siegel, R. L., Giaquinto, A. N. & Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J. Clin. 74, 12–49. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21820 (2024).
doi: 10.3322/caac.21820
pubmed: 38230766
Burleigh, A., Talhouk, A., Gilks, C. B. & McAlpine, J. N. Clinical and pathological characterization of endometrial cancer in young women: Identification of a cohort without classical risk factors. Gynecol. Oncol. 138, 141–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.02.028 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.02.028
pubmed: 25870916
Garg, K. & Soslow, R. A. Endometrial carcinoma in women aged 40 years and younger. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 138, 335–342. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2012-0654-RA (2014).
doi: 10.5858/arpa.2012-0654-RA
pubmed: 24576029
Soliman, P. T. et al. Risk factors for young premenopausal women with endometrial cancer. Obstet. Gynecol. 105, 575–580. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000154151.14516.f7 (2005).
doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000154151.14516.f7
pubmed: 15738027
Colombo, N. et al. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. 26, 2–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0000000000000609 (2016).
doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000609
pubmed: 26645990
Trojano, G. et al. Conservative treatment in early stage endometrial cancer: A review. Acta Biomed. 90, 405–410. https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v90i4.7800 (2019).
doi: 10.23750/abm.v90i4.7800
pubmed: 31910163
pmcid: 7233769
Rodolakis, A. et al. ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. 33, 208–222. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2022-004047 (2023).
doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2022-004047
pubmed: 36746507
Concin, N. et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecologic Cancer 31 (2021).
Oaknin, A. et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 33, 860–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2022.05.009 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.05.009
pubmed: 35690222
Nakao, Y. et al. MR imaging in endometrial carcinoma as a diagnostic tool for the absence of myometrial invasion. Gynecol. Oncol. 102, 343–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.12.028 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.12.028
pubmed: 16469365
Horvath, K., Pete, I., Vereczkey, I., Dudnyikova, A. & Godeny, M. Evaluation of the accuracy of preoperative MRI in measuring myometrial infiltration in endometrial carcinoma. Pathol. Oncol. Res. 20, 327–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-013-9699-9 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s12253-013-9699-9
pubmed: 24293380
Fujii, S. et al. Subendometrial enhancement and peritumoral enhancement for assessing endometrial cancer on dynamic contrast enhanced MR imaging. Eur. J. Radiol. 84, 581–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.01.004 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.01.004
pubmed: 25636389
Nougaret, S. et al. From staging to prognostication: Achievements and challenges of MR imaging in the assessment of endometrial cancer. Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. 25, 611–633 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2017.03.010
Manfredi, R. et al. Local-regional staging of endometrial carcinoma: Role of MR imaging in surgical planning. Radiology. 231, 372–378 (2004).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2312021184
pubmed: 15031434
McEvoy, S. H. et al. Fertility-sparing for young patients with gynecologic cancer: How MRI can guide patient selection prior to conservative management. Abdom. Radiol. 42, 2488–2512 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s00261-017-1179-3
Nougaret, S. et al. Endometrial Cancer MRI staging: Updated guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur. Radiol. 29, 792–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5515-y (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5515-y
pubmed: 29995239
Cui, T. et al. Peritumoral Enhancement for the evaluation of Myometrial Invasion in Low-Risk Endometrial Carcinoma on Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Front. Oncol. 11, 793709. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.793709 (2021).
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.793709
pubmed: 35111676
Avesani, G. et al. Update: 2023 FIGO Staging System for Endometrial Cancer. Radiographics. 44, e240084. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.240084 (2024).
doi: 10.1148/rg.240084
pubmed: 38935549
Kido, A., Himoto, Y., Kurata, Y., Minamiguchi, S. & Nakamoto, Y. Preoperative imaging evaluation of Endometrial Cancer in FIGO 2023. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging (2023).
Yamashita, Y. et al. Normal uterus and FIGO stage I endometrial carcinoma: Dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 186, 495–501. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.186.2.8421757 (1993).
doi: 10.1148/radiology.186.2.8421757
pubmed: 8421757
van Vaals, J. J. et al. Keyhole method for accelerating imaging of contrast agent uptake. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 3, 671–675. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.1880030419 (1993).
doi: 10.1002/jmri.1880030419
pubmed: 8347963
Winkelmann, S., Schaeffter, T., Koehler, T., Eggers, H. & Doessel, O. An optimal radial profile order based on the golden ratio for time-resolved MRI. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging. 26, 68–76 (2006).
doi: 10.1109/TMI.2006.885337
Reinhold, C. et al. Uterine adenomyosis: Endovaginal US and MR imaging features with histopathologic correlation. Radiographics. 19, S147–S160 (1999).
doi: 10.1148/radiographics.19.suppl_1.g99oc13s147
pubmed: 10517451
Yitta, S., Hecht, E. M., Mausner, E. V. & Bennett, G. L. Normal or abnormal? Demystifying uterine and cervical contrast enhancement at multidetector CT. Radiographics. 31, 647–661 (2011).
doi: 10.1148/rg.313105057
pubmed: 21571649
Park, S. B., Moon, M. H., Sung, C. K., Oh, S. & Lee, Y. H. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of endometrial cancer: Optimizing the imaging delay for tumour-myometrium contrast. Eur. Radiol. 24, 2795–2799 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-014-3327-2
pubmed: 25056550
Lee, M. S. et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI in women with endometrial cancer: Dynamic versus single-phase acquisitions. Clin. Med. Insights: Oncol. 17, 11795549231207833 (2023).
doi: 10.1177/11795549231207833
pubmed: 38023285