Publications

Detailed Information

Value of pelvic examination and imaging modality for the evaluation of tumor size in cervical cancer

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorLee, Yoo-Kyung-
dc.contributor.authorHan, Seung-Su-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Jae Weon-
dc.contributor.authorPark, Noh-Hyun-
dc.contributor.authorSong, Yong-Sang-
dc.contributor.authorKang, Soon-Beom-
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-30T23:39:21Z-
dc.date.available2010-06-30T23:39:21Z-
dc.date.issued2009-05-28-
dc.identifier.citationJ Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 19(2): 108-112en
dc.identifier.issn2005-0380 (Print)-
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=19471556-
dc.identifier.urihttp://synapse.koreamed.org/Synapse/Data/PDFData/1114JGO/jgo-19-108.pdf-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/68086-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of pelvic examination versus imaging modality such as computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the measurement of the tumor size of invasive cervical carcinoma based on pathologic findings. METHODS: Patients with stage Ib-II cervical cancer who underwent primary surgical treatment between January 2003 and December 2005 were evaluated retrospectively. One hundred three consecutive patients aged 24 to 81 years (mean age, 50.6 years), who had not received any treatment previously were included in this study. Accuracy of preoperative CT or MRI versus pelvic examination in the measurement of tumor size was compared based on pathologic findings. All patients were examined and staged clinically by the gynecologic oncologist. Surgery was performed within 2 weeks after imaging studies. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The largest diameter of the tumor measured by pathologic findings was 2.76+/-1.76 cm. Based on pathologic findings, accuracy was estimated by the degree of agreement with a difference of <0.5 or 1.0 cm between the measurements of tumor size obtained by pelvic examination and imaging modality. Pelvic examination and imaging modality had an accuracy of 46.6% and 39.8%, respectively, with a difference of <0.5 cm, and an accuracy of 72.8% and 55.3%, respectively, with a difference of <1.0 cm. Correlation with pathologic findings was higher for pelvic examination (r(s)=0.680) than for imaging modality (r(s)=0.410). In determining the size of tumor mass differentiating >4.0 cm fromen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherKorean Society of Gynecologic Oncology and Colposcopyen
dc.subjectUterine cervical neoplasmsen
dc.subjectPelvic examinationen
dc.subjectComputed tomographyen
dc.subjectMagnetic resonance imagingen
dc.titleValue of pelvic examination and imaging modality for the evaluation of tumor size in cervical canceren
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이유경-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor한승수-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김재원-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor박노현-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor송용상-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor강순범-
dc.identifier.doi10.3802/jgo.2008.19.2.108-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share