Gynecology & Obstetrics Case report Open Access

  • ISSN: 2471-8165
  • Journal h-index: 7
  • Journal CiteScore: 0.44
  • Journal Impact Factor: 1.86
  • Average acceptance to publication time (5-7 days)
  • Average article processing time (30-45 days) Less than 5 volumes 30 days
    8 - 9 volumes 40 days
    10 and more volumes 45 days

Commentary - (2022) Volume 8, Issue 1

Detecting & Imaging Gynaecological Cancers
Maron Joe*
 
Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States
 
*Correspondence: Maron Joe, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States, Email:

Received: 03-Jan-2022, Manuscript No. IPGOCR-22-12410; Editor assigned: 05-Apr-2022, Pre QC No. IPGOCR-22-12410; Reviewed: 14-Jan-2022, QC No. IPGOCR-22-12410; Revised: 19-Jan-2022, Manuscript No. IPGOCR-22-12410 (R); Published: 26-Jan-2022, DOI: 10.21767/2471-8165.100005

Introduction

In the treatment of malignant gynaecological disorders, radiology continues to play an important role. Ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography/computed tomography are among the imaging modalities used to investigate suspected gynaecological malignancies. In diagnosis, staging, treatment selection, and follow-up, each modality plays a unique role. The various imaging modalities and their functions in the imaging of malignant gynaecological illness are discussed in this review. The common imaging findings of female pelvic disease are described and shown [1].

Detection

Ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy- D- glucose. The advantages of several imaging modalities in gynaecological cancer will be discussed in this review. Please see "Imaging benign gynaecological disorders" for more information on the various approaches. In the early stages of suspected gynaecological cancer, ultrasound is the primary imaging modality. In symptomatic women, it is an excellent, relatively inexpensive initial screening test for determining endometrial thickness and identifying adnexal masses. It's not very useful for detecting or staging cervical cancer. The vascularity of ovarian lesions can be assessed using Colour Doppler, which can aid in characterization. When initial surgery is not an option for ovarian cancer, ultrasound can be utilised to guide biopsy of ovarian masses and peritoneal deposits, as well as ascites drainage [2-4]. FDG-PET/CT is a functional imaging technique that combines a low-dose CT with short-lived radionuclides coupled to tracers to image metabolic processes in the body. Fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG), which is converted to glucose, is the most often used radiotracer. As a result, many malignant tumours can be detected using FDG-PET due to their elevated glucolytic rate.

FDG uptake is common in the uterus, ovarian follicles, and corpus lutea in premenopausal women, and it is not limited to malignant processes. FDG uptake can also be found in ovarian and uterine tumours that are benign, as well as inflammatory and infectious events. Adenocarcinomas of the uterine epithelium account for approximately 90% of uterine carcinomas. Adenocarcinomas with squamous differentiation, adenosquamous carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma, and serous papillary carcinoma are all possible histological subtypes. Only 25 percent of malignant uterine tumours are uterine sarcomas. Only about 1% of lymphoma patients develop primary uterine lymphoma. Nongynaecological neoplasms seldom cause uterine metastases.

The most prevalent invasive gynaecological cancer is endometrial carcinoma. It manifests as postmenopausal bleeding (PMB), which is commonly treated with total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at an early stage. In all women with PMB, ultrasound is the primary imaging modality used to measure endometrial thickness. In a patient with PMB, an endometrial thickness of 4 mm necessitates hysteroscopy for additional study. Because US alone cannot differentiate between benign endometrial polyps, endometrial hyperplasia, and stage IA endometrial cancer, an endometrial biopsy is required.

The third most prevalent type of gynaecological cancer is cervical carcinoma. Cervical cancer deaths have decreased dramatically in the last 50 years, owing largely to the introduction of the Papanicolaou smear and the cervical screening programme. The launch of the human papillomavirus vaccine programme is projected to result in further reductions. Cervical cancer can be detected by a screening programme or through unusual vaginal bleeding, bloody discharge, or post-coital bleeding [5].

Uterine smooth muscle tumour leiomyosarcoma is a rare condition. Because both have intermediate signal intensity on T2WI and restricted diffusion on DWI, MRI cannot effectively identify cellular leiomyomas from leiomyosarcomas. An uneven margin, peripheral enhancement, rapid development on interval imaging, and the presence of internal bleeding, on the other hand, are all signs that something is wrong. Leiomyosarcoma is an uncommon smooth muscle tumour of the uterus. Because both cellular leiomyomas and leiomyosarcomas have intermediate signal intensity on T2WI and restricted diffusion on DWI, MRI cannot reliably distinguish them. However, in postmenopausal patients, an uneven margin, peripheral enhancement, rapid growth on interval imaging, and the presence of internal bleeding may indicate malignancy. Lymphoma and bone metastases are common symptoms of leiomyosarcoma.

Although ultrasound does not play a role in the diagnosis of cervical tumours, problems such as parametrial spread causing hydronephrosis or a tumour obstructing the endocervical canal creating a dilated uterine cavity can be easily observed. Advanced cervical cancer is staged using computed tomography, which shows distant and nodal disease. In the revised 2009 FIGO staging and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) recommendations, however, MR imaging is the investigation of choice for local staging [6]. Cervical illness is frequently diagnosed on the basis of a clinical examination alone, without the use of imaging. Imaging is mostly used to stage cervical cancer that has been confirmed by biopsy. The preferred imaging procedure is MRI. Even during a transvaginal examination, the US is unable to see the cervix and parametrial tissues well. The cervix's soft tissue alterations can only be seen with a CT scan.

Conclusion

The third most prevalent type of gynaecological cancer is cervical carcinoma. Cervical cancer deaths have decreased dramatically in the last 50 years, owing largely to the introduction of the Papanicolaou smear and the cervical screening programme. The launch of the human papillomavirus vaccine programme is projected to result in further reductions. Cervical cancer can be detected by a screening programme or through unusual vaginal bleeding, bloody discharge, or post-coital bleeding. In conjunction with clinical assessment, MRI and US can be utilised to monitor the inguinal lymph nodes for recurrent illness. CT is used to detect recurrence of distant metastatic illness.

REFERENCES

  1. Vandecaveye V, Dresen R, De Keyzer F (2017) Novel imaging techniques in gynaecological cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 29(5): 335-342.
  2.  [Google Scholar], [Cross Ref], [Indexed at]

  3. Rockall AG, Cross S, Flanagan S, Moore E, Avril N (2012) The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynaecological cancers. Cancer Imaging 12(1): 49.
  4. [Google Scholar], [Cross Ref], [Indexed at]

  5. Testa AC, Di Legge A, Virgilio B, Bonatti M, Manfredi R, et al. (2014) Which imaging technique should we use in the follow up of gynaecological cancer? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 28(5): 769-791.
  6. [Google Scholar], [Cross Ref], [Indexed at]

  7. Giammarile F, Bozkurt MF, Cibula D, Pahisa J, Oyen WJ, et al. (2014) The EANM clinical and technical guidelines for lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel node localization in gynaecological cancers. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41(7): 1463-1477.
  8. [Google Scholar], [Cross Ref], [Indexed at]

  9. Lai G, Rockall AG (2010) Lymph node imaging in gynecologic malignancy. InSeminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI 31(5): 363-376.
  10. [Google Scholar], [Cross Ref], [Indexed at]

  11. Motoshima S, Irie H, Nakazono T, Kamura T, Kudo S (2011) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in gynecologic cancers. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 22(4): 275-287.
  12. [Google Scholar], [Cross Ref], [Indexed at]

Citation: Joe M (2022) Detecting & Imaging Gynaecological Cancers. Gynecol Obstet Case Rep. Vol.8 No.1:5. DOI: 10.21767/2471-8165.100005.

Copyright: © 2022 Joe M, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.