Objective To evaluate the incidence and risk factors for mesorectal node metastasis (MRNM) in locally advanced cervical cancer.
Methods/Materials We performed an observational retrospective cohort study of 122 patients with cervical cancer who received definitive chemo-radiation treatment between December 2013 and June 2017 to evaluate the incidence of MRNM. Three diagnostic radiologists assessed all available pre-treatment images. In this study, the pelvic node metastasis was defined as ≥ 1.0 cm and MRNM as ≥ 0.5 cm for CT and MRI scans and as a maximum standardized uptake value of > 2.5 for PET/CT. The relationship of MRNM with FIGO stage, pelvic node metastasis, and mesorectal fascia involvement was evaluated.
Results The incidence of MRNM in all 122 patients was 8 (6.6%). However, in advanced stage (III– IV) patients, MRNM occurred in 4 of 39 (10.3%) compared with 4 of 83 (4.8%) in early stage (IB1–IIB) patients (p = 0.27). In patients with a positive pelvic node, MRNM occurred in 7 of 55 (12.7%) and 1 of 67 (1.5%) in those with negative pelvic node (p = 0.02). In addition, the incidence of MRNM was 3 of 9 (33.3%) in the presence of mesorectal fascia involvement and 5 of 113 (4.4%) among those without mesorectal fascia involvement (p = 0.013).
Conclusion This study indicates that pelvic node metastasis and mesorectal fascia involvement are high-risk factors for MRNM. Therefore, vigilance of reviewing images in the mesorectum for MRNM is necessary for high-risk patients.
- locally advanced cervical cancer
- incidence of mesorectal node metastasis
- pelvic radiotherapy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Ethics approval This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at our institution.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned, externally peer reviewed.