202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32135641)
41. Computed tomography in staging primary uterine cervical carcinoma.
Poon PY
J Can Assoc Radiol; 1983 Jun; 34(2):99-102. PubMed ID: 6885893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Long-term Outcomes of MRI Stage IIB Cervical Cancer.
Yoon A; Park JJ; Park BK; Lee YY; Paik ES; Choi CH; Kim TJ; Kim CK; Lee JW; Bae DS; Kim BG
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2016 Sep; 26(7):1252-7. PubMed ID: 27284726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Cervical cancer in the pregnant population.
Nguyen T; Nougaret S; Castillo P; Paspulati R; Bhosale P
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2023 May; 48(5):1679-1693. PubMed ID: 37071123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach.
Nicolet V; Carignan L; Bourdon F; Prosmanne O
Radiographics; 2000; 20(6):1539-49. PubMed ID: 11112809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Staging of cervical carcinomas. Comparison of body-coil magnetic resonance imaging and endorectal surface coil magnetic resonance imaging with histopathologic correlation.
Preidler KW; Tamussino K; Szolar DM; Ranner G; Ebner F
Invest Radiol; 1996 Jul; 31(7):458-62. PubMed ID: 8818786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Cervical and vulva cancer: changes in FIGO definitions of staging.
Shepherd JH
Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1996 May; 103(5):405-6. PubMed ID: 8624311
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
47. Evaluating the Role of F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Scanning in the Staging of Patients With Stage IIIB Cervical Carcinoma and the Impact on Treatment Decisions.
Morkel M; Ellmann A; Warwick J; Simonds H
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2018 Feb; 28(2):379-384. PubMed ID: 29324535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Annual report of Gynecologic Oncology Committee, Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2013.
Aoki D
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2014 Feb; 40(2):338-48. PubMed ID: 24472052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Multimodality therapy for locally advanced cervical carcinoma: state of the art and future directions.
Monk BJ; Tewari KS; Koh WJ
J Clin Oncol; 2007 Jul; 25(20):2952-65. PubMed ID: 17617527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. [Significance of prognostic evaluation of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009 staging system on stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma].
Wang ZQ; Zhang Y; Wang JL; Shen DH; Mu T; Zhao X; Yao YY; Bai Y; Wei LH
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2012 Jan; 47(1):33-9. PubMed ID: 22455691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Synchronous gynecologic cancer and the use of imaging for diagnosis.
Boaventura CS; Galvão JL; Soares GM; Bitencourt AG; Chojniak R; Bringel SL; Brot LD
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992); 2016 Apr; 62(2):116-9. PubMed ID: 27167539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Improving Global Outcomes in Cervical Cancer: The Time Has Come for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Staging to Formally Incorporate Advanced Imaging.
Jolly S; Uppal S; Bhatla N; Johnston C; Maturen K
J Glob Oncol; 2018 Sep; 4():1-6. PubMed ID: 30241155
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. Stage IA2 cervical carcinoma: how much treatment is enough?
Rogers LJ; Luesley DM
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2009 Dec; 19(9):1620-4. PubMed ID: 19994472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Arguments for a magnetic resonance imaging-assisted FIGO staging system for cervical cancer.
Narayan K
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2005; 15(4):573-82. PubMed ID: 16014109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Para-aortic nodal metastases in cervical cancer: a blind spot in the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system: current diagnosis and management.
Hwang L; Bailey A; Lea J; Albuquerque K
Future Oncol; 2015; 11(2):309-22. PubMed ID: 25591841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Does the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system for endometrial cancer lead to increased discrimination in patient outcomes?
Cooke EW; Pappas L; Gaffney DK
Cancer; 2011 Sep; 117(18):4231-7. PubMed ID: 21387282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines 2011 for the treatment of uterine cervical cancer.
Ebina Y; Yaegashi N; Katabuchi H; Nagase S; Udagawa Y; Hachisuga T; Saito T; Mikami M; Aoki Y; Yoshikawa H
Int J Clin Oncol; 2015 Apr; 20(2):240-8. PubMed ID: 25800808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Revisiting the role of computerized tomographic scan and cystoscopy for detecting bladder invasion in the revised FIGO staging system for carcinoma of the uterine cervix.
Sharma DN; Thulkar S; Goyal S; Shukla NK; Kumar S; Rath GK; Julka PK; Saini G; Bahl A
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2010 Apr; 20(3):368-72. PubMed ID: 20375799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. MRI and PET/CT for triaging stage IB clinically operable cervical cancer to appropriate therapy: decision analysis to assess patient outcomes.
Pandharipande PV; Choy G; del Carmen MG; Gazelle GS; Russell AH; Lee SI
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Mar; 192(3):802-14. PubMed ID: 19234280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the staging of cervical carcinoma: a pictorial review.
Smith GE; Gormly K
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2008 Oct; 52(5):427-33. PubMed ID: 19032387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
