About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
Procedure for reviewingReviewers 2023-2024
About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
Procedure for reviewingReviewers 2023-2024
Logout
Obstetrics and Gynegology2020№9
Magnetic resonance imaging in the...

Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis in disseminated ovarian cancer

DOI
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2020.9.38-47

Syrkashev E.M., Solopova A.E., Kulabukhova E.A.

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russian Federation
Ovarian cancer is one of the most common malignant neoplasms of the female reproductive system. The overwhelming majority of cases were diagnosed with advanced stages of the process in the presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis and parenchymal metastases. The extent of the disease is the most important prognostic factor. The 5-year survival rate for all types of ovarian cancer is 46% and varies substantially according to the stage: 92% for a localized process, 75% for locally advanced one, and only 29% among patients with distant metastases. The localization of secondary changes and the degree of damage considerably affect the likelihood of successful cytoreductive surgery that in turn determines the long-term prognosis of the disease. Multislice computed tomography (MSCT) is the standard for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. The sensitivity and specificity of MSCT depend primarily on the size and location of peritoneal implants that have a similar density to adjacent unaltered structures. This problem becomes especially urgent in the absence of ascites. The potential of multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) to improve the accuracy of staging of disseminated ovarian cancer and a response to the treatment performed is now increasingly discussed. This publication describes in detail the semiotics of disseminated ovarian cancer, presents the authors’ own verified clinical cases, and analyzes the capabilities of MRI in diagnosing different tumor dissemination patterns.

Keywords

disseminated ovarian cancer
peritoneal canceromatosis
magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI)
Full text (in Russian)

References

  1. Jemal A., Siegel R., Ward E., Hao Y., Xu J., Thun M.J. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA. Cancer J. Clin. 2009; 59(4): 225-49. https://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.20006.
  2. Šišovská I., Minář L., Felsinger M., Anton M., Bednaříková M., Hausnerová J. et al. Current FIGO staging classification for cancer of ovary, fallopian tube and peritoneum. Ceska Gynekol. 2017 Summer; 82(3): 230-6.
  3. Sugarbaker P.H., Jablonski K.A. Prognostic features of 51 colorectal and 130 appendiceal cancer patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis treated by cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Ann. Surg. 1995; 221(2): 124-32. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199502000-00002.
  4. Tentes A.A., Tripsiannis G., Markakidis S.K., Karanikiotis C.N., Tzegas G., Georgiadis G., Avgidou K. Peritoneal cancer index: a prognostic indicator of survival in advanced ovarian cancer. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2003; 29(1): 69-73. https://dx.doi.org/10.1053/ejso.2002.1380.
  5. Eisenkop S.M., Spirtos N.M., Friedman R.L., Lin W.C., Pisani A.L., Perticucci S. Relative influences of tumor volume before surgery and the cytoreductive outcome on survival for patients with advanced ovarian cancer : a prospective study. Gynecol. Oncol. 2003; 90( 2): 390-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0090-8258(03)00278-6.
  6. Fagotti A., Ferrandina G., Fanfani F., Ercoli A., Lorusso D., Rossi M., Scambia G. A laparoscopy-based score to predict surgical outcome in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma: a pilot study. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2006; 13(8):156-61. https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/ASO.2006.08.021.
  7. Dowdy S.C., Mullany S.A., Brandt K.R., Huppert B.J., Cliby W.A. The utility of computed tomography scans in predicting suboptimal cytoreductive surgery in women with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 2004; 101(2): 346-52. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20376.
  8. Janco J.M., Glaser G., Kim B., McGree M.E., Weaver A.L., Cliby W.A. et al. Development of a prediction model for residual disease in newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2015; 138(1): 70-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.04.013.
  9. Suidan R.S., Ramirez P.T., Sarasohn D.M., Teitcher J.B., Mironov S., Iyer R.B. et al. A multicenter prospective trial evaluating the ability of preoperative computed tomography scan and serum CA-125 to predict suboptimal cytoreduction at primary debulking surgery for advanced ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2014; 134(3): 455-61. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.07.002.
  10. Suidan R.S., Ramirez P.T., Sarasohn D.M., Teitcher J.B., Iyer R.B., Zhou Q. et al. A multicenter assessment of the ability of preoperative computed tomography scan and CA-125 to predict gross residual disease at primary debulking for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2017; 145(1): 27-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.02.020.
  11. Kumar A., Sheedy S., Kim B., Suidan R., Sarasohn D.M., Nikolovski I. et al. Models to predict outcomes after primary debulking surgery : Independent validation of models to predict suboptimal cytoreduction and gross residual disease. Gynecol. Oncol. 2019; 154(1): 72-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.04.011.
  12. Colombo N., Sessa C., du Bois A., Ledermann J., McCluggage W.G., McNeish I. et al. ESMO-ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: Pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease. Ann. Oncol. 30(5): 672-705. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdz062.
  13. Rybicki F.J., Glanc P. Patient-friendly summary of the ACR appropriateness criteria: staging and follow-up of ovarian cancer. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2019; 16(5): e23. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2019.01.014.
  14. Sureka B., Meena V., Garg P., Yadav T., Khera P.S. Computed tomography imaging of ovarian peritoneal carcinomatosis: a pictorial review. Pol. J. Radiol. 2019; 83: e500-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2018.80247.
  15. Javadi S., Ganeshan D.M., Qayyum A., Iyer R.B., Bhosale P. Ovarian cancer, the revised FIGO staging system, and the role of imaging. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2016; 206(6): 1351-60. https://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.15199.
  16. Gadelhak B., Tawfik A.M., Saleh G.A., Batouty N.M., Sobh D.M., Hamdy O., Refky B. Extended abdominopelvic MRI versus CT at the time of adnexal mass characterization for assessing radiologic peritoneal cancer index (PCI) prior to cytoreductive surgery. Abdom. Radiol. 2019; 44(6): 2254-61. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-019-01939-y.
  17. Low R.N., Barone R.M., Lucero J. Comparison of MRI and CT for Predicting the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) preoperatively in patients being considered for cytoreductive surgical procedures. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2015; 22(5): 1708-15. https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4041-7.
  18. Meyers M.A., Oliphant M., Berne A.S., Feldberg M.A. The peritoneal ligaments and mesenteries: pathways of intraabdominal spread of disease. Radiology. 1987; 163(3): 593-604.
  19. Mikuła-Pietrasik J., Uruski P., Tykarski A., Książek K. The peritoneal ‘soil’ for a cancerous ‘seed’: a comprehensive review of the pathogenesis of intraperitoneal cancer metastases. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2018; 75(3): 509-25. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00018-017-2663-1.
  20. Carmignani C.P., Sugarbaker T.A., Bromley C.M., Sugarbaker P.H. Intraperitoneal cancer dissemination: mechanisms of the patterns of spread. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2003; 22(4): 465-72. https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a:1023791229361.
  21. Nath S., Pigula M., Khan A.P., Hanna W., Ruhi M.K., Dehkordy F.M. et al. Flow-induced shear stress confers resistance to carboplatin in an adherent three-dimensional model for ovarian cancer: a role for EGFR-targeted photoimmunotherapy informed by physical stress. J. Clin. Med. 2020; 9(4): 924. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9040924.
  22. Feki A., Berardi P., Bellingan G., Major A., Krause K.H., Petignat P. et al. Dissemination of intraperitoneal ovarian cancer: Discussion of mechanisms and demonstration of lymphatic spreading in ovarian cancer model. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 2009; 72(1): 1-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2008.12.003.
  23. Sobin L.H. From the archives of the AFIP secondary tumors and tumorlike lesions of the peritoneal cavity: imaging features with pathologic correlation. Radiographics. . 2009; 29(2): 347-73. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.292085189.
  24. Espada M., Garcia-Flores J.R., Jimenez M., Alvarez-Moreno E., De Haro M., Gonzalez-Cortijo L. et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intra-abdominal sites of implants to predict likelihood of suboptimal cytoreductive surgery in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Eur. Radiol. 2013; 23(9): 2636-42. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2837-7.
  25. Tempany C.M., Zou K.H., Silverman S.G., Brown D.L., Kurtz A.B., McNeil B.J. Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities--report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology. 2000; 215(3): 761-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.3.r00jn25761.
  26. Glaser G., Torres M., Kim B., Aletti G., Weaver A., Mariani A. The use of CT findings to predict extent of tumor at primary surgery for ovarian cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2013; 130(2): 280-3. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.05.007.
  27. Nasser S., Lazaridis A., Evangelou M., Jones B., Nixon K., Kyrgiou M. et al. Correlation of pre-operative CT findings with surgical & histological tumor dissemination patterns at cytoreduction for primary advanced and relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer: A retrospective evaluation. Gynecol. Oncol. 2016; 143(2):.264-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.08.322.
  28. Castellani F., Nganga E.C., Dumas L., Banerjee S., Rockall A.G. Imaging in the pre-operative staging of ovarian cancer. Abdom. Radiol. 2019; 44(2): 685-96. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1779-6.
  29. Gupta M.K., Khatri G., Bailey A., Pinho D.F., Costa D., Pedrosa I. Endoluminal contrast for abdomen and pelvis magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom. Radiol. 2016; 41(7): 1378-98, https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0668-0.

Received 06.07.2020

Accepted 27.07.2020

About the Authors

Egor M. Syrkashev, MD, Researcher of the Radiology Department, National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology
named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. E-mail: e_syrkashev@oparina4.ru. 4 Oparin str., 117997, Moscow, Russia.
Alina E. Solopova, PhD in Medical sciences, Leading Researcher, Radiology Department, National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology
named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. E-mail: a_solopova@oparina4.ru. 4 Oparin str., 117997, Moscow, Russia
Elena G. Kulabukhova, MD, PhD, Radiology Department, National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology
named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. 4 Oparin str., 117997, Moscow, Russia

For citation: Syrkashev E.M., Solopova A.E., Kulabukhova E.A.Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis indisseminated ovarian cancer.
Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2020; 9: 38-47 (in Russian).
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2020.9.38-47
By continuing to use our site, you consent to the processing of cookies that ensure the proper functioning of the site.