Diagnostic value of multislice computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer: a literature review

Abstract

Testicular cancer is the most frequent malignant disorder in men aged 15-35 years. Generally, diagnosing and follow-up include computer tomography (CT) examinations to detect possible retroperitoneal spread (abdomen and pelvis), resulting in at least eight CT examinations. This patient group is thereby exposed to a non-neglectable radiation dose, increasing the risk of future radiation-induced secondary cancer. This is especially problematic in potentially surgically cured patients with stage 1 testicular cancer. Thus, it can be beneficial to substitute CT with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), provided there is valid evidence that the diagnostic value of MRI is at least comparable to current multislice CT (MSCT). The purpose of this study was to analyze whether there is evidence to recommend a substitution of MSCT with MRI in the diagnosis of retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer. A literature search on the diagnostic accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of MSCT and MRI in the diagnosis of retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer was performed in the following databases: PubMed, EmBase, and ISI Web of Science. The search was limited to include the period from 2000 to September 2008, and to human and English-language publications. Forty-four publications were obtained for formal review (27 from PubMed, 15 from EmBase, two from ISI Web of Science). None of the publications reviewed encompassed diagnostic specificity and sensitivity of MSCT, and they lacked systematic comparison of MSCT and MRI. Only one study included sensitivity and specificity of MRI compared to single-slice CT. Both methods had a sensitivity and a specificity of approximately 70%. The literature review did not reveal valid data regarding diagnostic accuracy of MRI compared with MSCT for diagnosing retroperitoneal spread of testicular cancer. A prospective blinded comparative study is needed to provide valid evidence.

Maintaining success, reducing treatment burden, focusing on survivorship: highlights from the third European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer

“…The majority of panelists voted against performing biopsies in EGCC patients when both of the testes were normal upon clinical examination and ultrasound (supplementary material S3, available at Annals of Oncology online). Spiral computerized tomography (CT) scans of the thorax, abdomen and pelvis remain the staging investigation of choice (Table 1) [12]. Diagnostic imaging of the brain is recommended in patients with visceral metastases and mandatory in the presence neurological symptoms (supplementary material S4, available at Annals of Oncology online).…”

Predictive models for lymph node metastases in patients with testicular germ cell tumors

“…Aparicio et al pointed out increased preoperative Beta-HCG level adversely affected outcome in patients with CS1 seminoma [3], as well as the findings of Vesprini D et al demonstrated HCG was the most common increased marker at the time of relapse [23]. The most accepted risk factors for STGCT are tumor size and rete testis invasion as well as the ones for NSTGCT are vascular invasion and the percentage of embryonal carcinoma [11,13,24,25]. Our study also confirmed that tumor size (OR 6.1; 95% CI 1.6-22.4) and lymphovascular invasion (OR 3.4; 95%, 1.5-7.4) were IRFs in predictive Model s2 and Model n2, respectively.…”

“…In CS1 STGCT and NSTGCT, only approximately 20% and 30% of patients will relapse in 5 years after orchiectomy, which means about 70-80% patients will face unnecessary surgery injury from RPLND or secondary radiation-induced cancer due to frequent CT monitors (at least 79 in STGCT and 89 in NSTGCT during 5-year follow-up) [4,25]. For reducing these risks, some researchers proposed adept treatment strategy and the interval CT follow-ups depending on risk factors of relapse.…”

Surveillance des séminomes testiculaires de stade I : résultats oncologiques sur 20ans

“…Ainsi, Rustin et al n'ont pas mis en évidence d'intérêt à réaliser 5 scanners plutôt que 2, dans le suivi de patients présentant une tumeur non séminomateuse de stade I [19] ; • remplacer les scanners par des IRM. Mais il faut pour cela prouver l'équivalence d'efficacité entre les deux méthodes dans la surveillance des cancers testiculaires, ce qui n'est pas encore le cas [20].…”