Bản thảo 1
Doan Van Ngoc, Bui Van Lenh, Bui Dieu

Main Article Content


A prospective descriptive study of 56 cervical cancer patients, were taken 1.5T MRI before surgery, and has result pathology after surgery in the hospital K.

Results: The min and max ages are 25 and 68, the average age is 45.3 ± 10.4. Squamous-cell carcinoma 76.8%, Adenocarcinoma 17.9%. 98.2% mass shows a slightly hyperintense in T2-weighted MR image, 89,3% shows a isointense in T1W, 83.9% shows a hyperintense in Diffusion (b800), 75.0% T1FS-weighted MR image shows poorly absorbed drugs for muscle fiber uterus after injection, 53.6% heterogeneous infiltration strong enhancement of the tumor. Assess tumor size has Acc and PPV 94.6%. The rating invasive vaginal has Sn 66.7%, Sp 100%, Acc 98.2%, PPV 100% and NPV 98.1%. Invasive parametre has Sn, Sp, Acc, PPV and NPV 100%. Invasive sides pelvis has Sp 100%, Acc and NPV 98.2%. Diagnosed lymph node metastases with Sn 50%, Sp 97.8%, Acc 89.3%, PPV 89.3% and NPV 90.0%. Staging of the MRI 1.5T has Acc and PPV 91.1%.

Conclusion:  Image 1.5T MRI on observable clarity T2WI, DWI before the injection and T1FS after the injection contract. 1.5T MRI has high value for staging Cervical cancer. MRI should be used routinely for staging Cervical cancer.


Cervical cancer, MRI of cervical, staging cervical cancer


1. Globocan Cervical Cancer, (2012). Estimated Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide in 2012, globocan.iarc.fr/old/FactSheets/cancers/cervix-new.asp (accessed 21.5.15) 1-3.
2. Cecelia Boardman, (2016), Cervical Cancer, emedicine.medscape.com/article/253513-verview#showall, 1-2.
3. Okamoto Y, Tanaka YO, Nishida M,et al (2003). “MR imaging of the uterine cervix: imaging-pathologic correlation”, RadioGraphics; 23(2):425–445; quiz 534–535.
4. Ngô Thị Tính, (2011). Nghiên cứu mức xâm lấn của ung thư cổ tử cung GĐ IB - IIB qua LS, CHT và kết quả điều trị tại bệnh viện K từ 2007-2009, Luận án tiến sĩ Y học, Trường Đại học Y Hà Nội.
5. Trần Đặng Ngọc Linh, (2013). Hiệu quả xạ trị trong ung thư cổ tử cung GĐ IIB-IIIB, Luận án tiến sĩ Y học, Trường Đại học Y Dược thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.
6. Doãn Văn Ngọc, Bùi Văn Lệnh, Bùi Diệu (2016). “Đặc điểm lâm sàng, cận lâm sàng và hình ảnh cộng hưởng từ 1.5T của ung thư cổ tử cung”, Tạp chí khoa học ĐHQGHN, Khoa học Y Dược, ISSN 0866-8612, Vol. 32, No.2, 2016, 82-92.
7. Smith HO, Tiffany MF, Qualls CR, Key CR (2000). The rising incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix in the United States--a 24-year population-based study. Gynecol Oncol, 78(2), 97-105.
8. Claudia C C, Sylvia M F, Karen V P, et al, (2007). “Magnetic resonance imaging in the staging of cervical cancer”, Radiol Bras, Vol. 40, No. 3. 187-95
9. Viviane N, Louis C, France B, and Odile P, (2000). “MR Imaging of Cervical Carcinoma: A Practical Staging Approach”, RadioGraphics, Vol 20, Iss 6. 1765-98
10. Lê Tuấn Linh, Nguyễn Duy Huề, (2009). “Vai trò của CHT 1.5 Tesla trong bệnh lý ung thư cổ tử cung”, Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 361, 64-70.
11. Susan J F, Ahmed M A, Masako Y K, et al, (2012). “The Revised FIGO Staging System for Uterine Malignancies: Implications for MR Imaging”, RadioGraphics, Volume 32, issue 6. 144-58.
12. Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, et al (2006). “Early invasive cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol.;24:5687–5694.
13. Sala E, Wakely S, Senior E, Lomas D, (2007). “MRI of malignant neoplasms of the uterine corpus and cervix”, AJR Am J Roentgenol.;188:1577–1587.
14. Charis Bourgioti, Konstantinos Chatoupis, Lia Angela Moulopoulos (2016). “Current imaging strategies for the evaluation of uterine cervical cancer”, World J Radiol , 2016 April 28; 8(4): 342-354 ISSN 1949-8470.
15. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, et al, (1988). “Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings”. Radiology; 166(3):623–635.
16. Zand KR, Reinhold C, Abe H, et al (2007). “Magnetic resonance imaging of the cervix”, Cancer Imaging; 7:69–76.
17. Sala E, Rockall AG, Freeman SJ, et al (2013). “The added role of MR imaging in treatment stratification of patients with gynecologic malignancies: what the radiologist needs to know”. Radiology; 266:717–740.
18. Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Coakley FV, et al. “Early invasive cervical cancer: CT and MR imaging in preoperative evaluation—ACRIN/GOG comparative study of diagnostic performance and interobserver variability”. Radiology ; 245:491-498.