Diagnostic Value of Multislice Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Retroperitoneal Spread of Testicular Cancer: A Literature Review

• Published in: Acta Radiologica 2009-11, Vol.50 (9), p.1064-1070
• Main Authors: Hansen, J., Jurik, A. G.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics; Humans; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects); Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Male; Male genital diseases; Medical sciences; Retroperitoneal Neoplasms - diagnosis; Retroperitoneal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Retroperitoneal Neoplasms - secondary; Testicular Neoplasms - pathology; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods; Tumors
• ISSN: 0284-1851; 1600-0455
• DOI: 10.3109/02841850903220371

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.