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.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Southern African Journal of Gynaecological Oncology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
