Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nodal staging in genitourinary cancers

  • LYMPH NODE ASSESSMENT IN ABDOMINAL CANCER
  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In patients with genitourinary cancers nodal staging is an integral part of the pretreatment evaluation. The presence of nodal metastatic disease plays an important role in predicting prognosis and treatment planning. Although some nodal groups can be evaluated clinically, most patients undergo various imaging studies for nodal staging. Each modality has its own unique attributes and applications. This article reviews various imaging modalities, namely, contrast enhanced computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography, used for nodal staging in patients with genitourinary cancers and highlights their strengths and weaknesses. Emerging novel techniques such as lymphotropic nanoparticle enhanced MRI are also highlighted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E, et al. (2005) Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 55:10–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gervasi LA, Mata J, Easley JD, et al. (1989) Prognostic significance of lymph nodal metastases in prostate cancer. J Urol 142:332–336

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Borley N, Fabrin K, Sriprasad S, et al. (2003) Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection allows significantly more accurate staging in “high-risk” prostate cancer compared to MRI or CT. Scand J Urol Nephrol 37:382–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Stehman FB, Bundy BN, DiSaia PJ, Keys HM, Larson JE, Fowler WC (1991) Carcinoma of the cervix treated with radiation therapy. I. A multi-variate analysis of prognostic variables in the gynecologic oncology group. Cancer 67:2776–2785

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Alvarez RD, Soong SJ, Kinney WK, et al. (1989) Identification of prognostic factors and risk groups in patients found to have nodal metastasis at the time of radical hysterectomy for early-stage squamous carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 35:130–135

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Greer BE, Koh WJ, Stelzer KJ, Goff BA, Comsia N, Tran A (1996) Expanded pelvic radiotherapy fields for treatment of local-regionally advanced carcinoma of the cervix: Outcome and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174:1141–1149; discussion 1149–1150

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Stryker JA, Mortel R (2000) Survival following extended field irradiation in carcinoma of cervix metastatic to para-aortic lymph nodes. Gynecol Oncol 79:399–405

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Freedman LS, Parkinson MC, Jones WG, et al. (1987) Histopathology in the prediction of relapse of patients with stage I testicular teratoma treated by orchidectomy alone. Lancet 2:294–298

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Read G, Stenning SP, Cullen MH, et al. (1992) Medical research council prospective study of surveillance for stage I testicular teratoma. medical research council testicular tumors working party. J Clin Oncol 10:1762–1768

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nicolai N, Pizzocaro G (1995) A surveillance study of clinical stage I nonseminomatous germ cell tumors of the testis: 10-year followup. J Urol 154:1045–1049

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sedlis A, Homesley H, Bundy BN, et al. (1987) Positive groin lymph nodes in superficial squamous cell vulvar cancer. A gynecologic oncology group study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 156:1159–1164

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Micali G, Nasca MR, Innocenzi D, Schwartz RA (2004) Invasive penile carcinoma: a review. Dermatol Surg 30:311–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Barranger E, Darai E (2004) Lymphatic mapping for gynecologic malignancies. Semin Oncol 31:394–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Zincke H, Farrow GM, Myers RP, Benson RC Jr, Furlow WL, Utz DC (1982) Relationship between grade and stage of adenocarcinoma of the prostate and regional pelvic lymph node metastases. J Urol 128:498–501

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim JY, Harisinghani MG (2004) MR imaging staging of pelvic lymph nodes. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 12:581–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vinnicombe SJ, Norman AR, Nicolson V, Husband JE (1995) Normal pelvic lymph nodes: Evaluation with CT after bipedal lymphangiography. Radiology 194:349–355

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Guermazi A, Brice P, Hennequin C, Sarfati E (2003) Lymphography: an old technique retains its usefulness. Radiographics 23:1541–1558, discussion 1559–1560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim SH, Kim SC, Choi BI, Han MC (1994) Uterine cervical carcinoma: evaluation of pelvic lymph node metastasis with MR imaging. Radiology 190:807–811

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Jager GJ, Barentsz JO, Oosterhof GO, Witjes JA, Ruijs SJ (1996) Pelvic adenopathy in prostatic and urinary bladder carcinoma: MR imaging with a three-dimensional TI-weighted magnetization-prepared-rapid gradient-echo sequence. AJR 167:1503–1507

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bipat S, Glas AS, van der Velden J, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J (2003) Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 91:59–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L, Stern JL (1995) Cervical carcinoma: Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol 86:43–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY, Cheung TH, Metreweli C (2000) Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR 175:759–766

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Pieterman RM, van Putten JW, Meuzelaar JJ, et al. (2000) Preoperative staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography. N Engl J Med 343:254–261

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Schoder H, Larson SM (2004) Positron emission tomography for prostate, bladder, and renal cancer. Semin Nucl Med 34:274–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lin WC, Hung YC, Yeh LS, Kao CH, Yen RF, Shen YY (2003) Usefulness of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to detect para-aortic lymph nodal metastasis in advanced cervical cancer with negative computed tomography findings. Gynecol Oncol 89:73–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D, et al. (2001) Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 218:776–782

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Oyama N, Akino H, Kanamaru H, et al. (2002) 11C-Acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 43:181–186

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Tiguert R, Gheiler EL, Tefilli MV, et al. (1999) Lymph node size does not correlate with the presence of prostate cancer metastasis. Urology 53:367–371

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Heller PB, Maletano JH, Bundy BN, Barnhill DR, Okagaki T (1990) Clinical-pathologic study of stage IIB, III, and IVA carcinoma of the cervix: extended diagnostic evaluation for paraaortic node metastasis––a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 38:425–430

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Yu KK, Hricak H, Subak LL, Zaloudek CJ, Powell CB (1998) Preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma: phased array coil fast spin-echo versus body coil spin-echo T2-weighted MR imaging. AJR 171:707–711

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Bellin MF, Lebleu L, Meric JB (2003) Evaluation of retroperitoneal and pelvic lymph node metastases with MRI and MR lymphangiography. Abdom Imaging 28:155–163

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Bellin MF, Roy C, Kinkel K, et al. (1998) Lymph node metastases: safety and effectiveness of MR imaging with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles––initial clinical experience. Radiology 207:799–808

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Harisinghani MG, Barentsz J, Hahn PF, et al. (2003) Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 348:2491–2499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Harisinghani MG, Barentsz JO, Hahn PF, et al. (2002) MR lymphangiography for detection of minimal nodal disease in patients with prostate cancer. Acad Radiol 9 (Suppl 2):S312–S313

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Harisinghani MG, Saini S, Hahn PF, Weissleder R, Mueller PR (1998) MR imaging of lymph nodes in patients with primary abdominal and pelvic malignancies using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide (combidex). Acad Radiol 5 (Suppl 1):S167–S169, discussion S183–S184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rockall AG, Sohaib SA, Harisinghani MG, et al. (2005) Diagnostic performance of nanoparticle-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of lymph node metastases in patients with endometrial and cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:2813–2821

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Anzai Y, Piccoli CW, Outwater EK, et al. (2003) Evaluation of neck and body metastases to nodes with ferumoxtran 10-enhanced MR imaging: phase III safety and efficacy study. Radiology 228:777–788

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Harisinghani MG, Dixon WT, Saksena MA, et al. (2004) MR lymphangiography: imaging strategies to optimize the imaging of lymph nodes with ferumoxtran-10. Radiographics 24:867–878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA

    M. A. Saksena, J. Y. Kim & M. G. Harisinghani

Authors
  1. M. A. Saksena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Y. Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. G. Harisinghani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. A. Saksena.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Saksena, M.A., Kim, J.Y. & Harisinghani, M.G. Nodal staging in genitourinary cancers. Abdom Imaging 31, 644–651 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-006-9020-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-006-9020-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation