A retrospective analysis comparing clinical staging with magnetic resonance imaging staging in patients with cervical cancer

Abstract

AbstractThis single-institution retrospective study compares the accuracy of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) staging of cervical cancer. For patients who underwent surgery, MRI and clinical staging were compared to final pathological stage. Pathological stage was utilised as the reference standard.One hundred and twenty-eight patients underwent MRI and 45 proceeded to surgery. There was concurrence between MRI staging and pathological stage in only 29.3% of patients. MRI overestimated staging in 53.6% of the patients, and underestimated staging in 17.1%. The comparison between clinical staging and pathological stage indicated concurrences in 43.9% of the patients. Stage was overestimated in 19.5% and was underestimated in 36.6%. There was no statistically significant difference between the two staging options.