Chavaro VN, Arroyo HG, Alcázar LF, Muruchi GGW, Pérez ZI

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 61-79
PDF size: 1843.81 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Cervicouterine Cancer (CaCu) is the leading cause of death by malignant neoplasia in the group aged 25-64. This disease mortality has declined in recent years as a result of the increase in the availability of timely screening programs. There are many advances in the study of this disease pathogenesis, which has made possible to know the role of human papilloma virus in the development of pre-malignant and malignant cervix lesions.
Objective: A review of epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnostic methods, and screening, sorting, and imaging methods usefulness is made.
Imaging methods: Cervical carcinoma staging is clinical, however it can rely on the imaging methods, especially CT and MR, although the latter is most used for the best definition. Both are useful to stage advanced disease and detect recurrence. On the other hand, PETCT is a reliable method in the lymph nodes, metastasis distance and the response to treatment evaluation.
Discussion: This entity is still a public health issue. It is important to carry out screening methods to all population sectors to reduce morbidity and mortality due to this disease. Prevention methods with the recent use of vaccines have had satisfactory results. The development in imaging methods has allowed the better staging and treatment planning.
Conclusion: CaCu definitive diagnosis is histological. Imaging methods are an important tool for staging and surgical planning, as well as in the response to treatment evaluation and recurrence of this disease detection.

REFERENCES

1. Modificación a la Norma Oficial Mexicana (NOM-014-SSA2-1994) para la prevención, detección, diagnóstico, tratamiento, control y vigilancia epidemiológica del cáncer cervicouterino. Diario Oficial, 2007.

2. Bulnes R. El cáncer en Centroamérica. Reseña Histórica. Rev/Med Hondur 2005; 73: 54-63.

3. Romero N. Reseña histórica de la citopatología y los orígenes del Papanicolaou. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Anales de la Facultad de Medicina 2001; 62: 342-6.

4. Warren JB, Gullett, H, King V. Cervical Cancer Screening and Update Guidelines. 2009 Primare Care: Clinics in Office Practice 2009; 36.

5. Tovar V. Panorama epidemiológico de la mortalidad por cáncer cervicouterino en México (1980-2004). Rev Fac Med UNAM 2008; 51(2).

6. Hidalgo-Martínez A. El cáncer cervicouterino, su impacto en México y el porqué no funciona el programa nacional de detección oportuna. Rev Biomed 2006; 17: 81-4.

7. Registro Histopatológico de Neoplasias Malignas; 2001.

8. Martínez F. Epidemiología del cáncer del cuello uterino. Medicina Universitaria 2004; 6(22): 39-46.

9. Yoshikazu O, Yumiko T, Masato N. MR Imaging of the Uterine Cervix: Imaging- Pathologic Correlation. Radiographics 2003; 23: 425-45.

10. Jhingran A. Abeloff: Abeloff’s Clinical Oncology. 4th. Ed. Chap. 91. Cancers of the cervix, vulva, and vagina; 2008.

11. Smith R, Cokkinides V, Brawley O. Cancer screening in the United States, 2009: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2009; 59: 27-41.

12. Akin O. Imaging of uterine cancer. Radiol Clin N Am 2007; 45: 167-82.

13. Panuu H, Corl F, Fishman E. CT Evaluation of Cervical Cancer: Spectrum of Disease. Radiographics 2001; 21: 1155-68.

14. Motta G. Concordancia de la etapificación del cáncer cervicouterino entre la exploración clínica y los hallazgos tomográficos. Anales de Radiología México 2006; 4: 275-92.

15. Hustinx P, Torigian D, Namur G. Complementary Assessment of Abdominopelvic Disorders with PET/CT and MRI PET Clin 2009; 3: 435-49.

16. Kahn J. HPV Vaccination for the Prevention of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia. NEJM 2009; 361(3): 271-8.