These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
290 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32731266)
21. Lacunae in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification for cervical carcinoma: observational study using TNM classification as comparator. Meva J; Chaudhary RK; Bhaduri D; Bhatia M; Hatti S; Ba R Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2013 Jul; 23(6):1071-7. PubMed ID: 23792602 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Magnetic resonance imaging and its value in the staging of cervical carcinoma - Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and pathological images with FIGO staging system. Kirova G; Nedialkov K; Sergieva S J BUON; 2004; 9(2):127-38. PubMed ID: 17415805 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 2018 FIGO Staging Classification for Cervical Cancer: Added Benefits of Imaging. Salib MY; Russell JHB; Stewart VR; Sudderuddin SA; Barwick TD; Rockall AG; Bharwani N Radiographics; 2020 Oct; 40(6):1807-1822. PubMed ID: 32946322 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. [FIGO 2018 staging of cervical cancer and related issues]. Wang JD; Kong WM; Jiang H Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2020 Feb; 42(2):94-98. PubMed ID: 32135641 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Association between developmental steps in the organogenesis of the uterine cervix and locoregional progression of cervical cancer: a prospective clinicopathological analysis. Höckel M; Hentschel B; Horn LC Lancet Oncol; 2014 Apr; 15(4):445-56. PubMed ID: 24656439 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Implications of the revised cervical cancer FIGO staging system. Bhatla N; Singhal S; Dhamija E; Mathur S; Natarajan J; Maheshwari A Indian J Med Res; 2021 Aug; 154(2):273-283. PubMed ID: 35295012 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Patterns of failure and prognostic factor analyses in locally advanced cervical cancer patients staged by magnetic resonance imaging and treated with curative intent. Narayan K; Fisher RJ; Bernshaw D Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2008; 18(3):525-33. PubMed ID: 18476950 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Staging of cervix cancer using MRT]. Einspieler R; Ebner F; Hofmann HM; Ranner G; Tamussino K; Justich E Rofo; 1990 Jan; 152(1):67-70. PubMed ID: 2154013 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Interobserver agreement and prognostic impact for MRI-based 2018 FIGO staging parameters in uterine cervical cancer. Wagner-Larsen KS; Lura N; Salvesen Ø; Halle MK; Forsse D; Trovik J; Smit N; Krakstad C; Haldorsen IS Eur Radiol; 2022 Sep; 32(9):6444-6455. PubMed ID: 35332408 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. The prognostic role of horizontal and circumferential tumor extent in cervical cancer: Implications for the 2019 FIGO staging system. Zyla RE; Gien LT; Vicus D; Olkhov-Mitsel E; Mirkovic J; Nofech-Mozes S; Djordjevic B; Parra-Herran C Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Aug; 158(2):266-272. PubMed ID: 32471646 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Integrated PET/MRI for whole-body staging of patients with primary cervical cancer: preliminary results. Grueneisen J; Schaarschmidt BM; Heubner M; Aktas B; Kinner S; Forsting M; Lauenstein T; Ruhlmann V; Umutlu L Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2015 Nov; 42(12):1814-24. PubMed ID: 26199113 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Changing trend in the patterns of pretreatment diagnostic assessment for patients with cervical cancer in Japan. Tomita N; Toita T; Kodaira T; Shinoda A; Uno T; Numasaki H; Teshima T; Mitsumori M Gynecol Oncol; 2011 Dec; 123(3):577-80. PubMed ID: 21945554 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Prediction of cervical infiltration in Stage II endometrial cancer by different preoperative evaluation techniques (D&C, US, CT, MRI). Pete I; Godény M; Tóth E; Radó J; Pete B; Pulay T Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2003; 24(6):517-22. PubMed ID: 14658593 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. Implications of the new FIGO staging and the role of imaging in cervical cancer. Kido A; Nakamoto Y Br J Radiol; 2021 Sep; 94(1125):20201342. PubMed ID: 33989030 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Pretreatment staging of cervical cancer: is imaging better than palpation?: Role of CT and MRI in preoperative staging of cervical cancer: single institution results for 255 patients. Hancke K; Heilmann V; Straka P; Kreienberg R; Kurzeder C Ann Surg Oncol; 2008 Oct; 15(10):2856-61. PubMed ID: 18696156 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Magnetic resonance imaging of cervical carcinoma using an endorectal surface coil. Brocker KA; Alt CD; Gebauer G; Sohn C; Hallscheidt P Eur J Radiol; 2014 Jul; 83(7):1030-1035. PubMed ID: 24794864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]