Search

Simple Summary: Constant technological development of modern imaging has led to substantial improvement in management and decision-making in the diagnostic and prognostic process of many different neoplasms. This also applies to cervical cancer. The main evidence, providing the base of recently updated ESGO-ESTRO-ESP recommendations (2023) on the management and treatment of cervical cancer, has been evaluated and reviewed in this paper. Ultrasound has been suggested as a valid alternative to MRI in primary diagnostic workup of cervical cancer if performed by an expert sonographer. Additionally, CT or PET/CT exhibits a substantial role in assessing the extrapelvic spread of the disease in locally advanced cases or when suspicious lymph nodes are detected. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive review of the role of different imaging techniques in staging settings, displaying a focused interest in the use of ultrasound. Following the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) joint guidelines (2018) for the management of patients with cervical cancer, treatment decisions should be guided by modern imaging techniques. After five years (2023), an update of the ESGO-ESTRO-ESP recommendations was performed, further confirming this statement. Transvaginal/transrectal ultrasound (TRS/TVS) or pelvic magnetic resonance (MRI) enables tumor delineation and precise assessment of its local extent, including the evaluation of the depth of infiltration in the bladder- or rectal wall. Additionally, both techniques have very high specificity to confirm the presence of metastatic pelvic lymph nodes but fail to exclude them due to insufficient sensitivity to detect small-volume metastases, as in any other currently available imaging modality. In early-stage disease (T1a to T2a1, except T1b3) with negative lymph nodes on TVS/TRS or MRI, surgicopathological staging should be performed. In all other situations, contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) or 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography combined with CT (PET-CT) is recommended to assess extrapelvic spread. This paper aims to review the evidence supporting the implementation of diagnostic imaging with a focus on ultrasound at primary diagnostic workup of cervical cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Endometrial cancer has a high epidemiological impact, and its management is part of everyday clinical practice. International guidelines have been arranged over the years according to major recent discoveries. The application of the guidelines released by different international gynecological societies is still matter of debate as they diverge in many issues. Authors wanted to compare them and point out the differences, aiming to both draw the attention to a need of unification and to provide a useful tool for clinicians. Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological malignancy in Europe and its management involves a variety of health professionals. In recent years, big discoveries were made concerning the management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer, particularly in the field of molecular biology and minimally invasive surgery. This requires the continuous updating of guidelines and protocols over the years. In this paper, we aim to summarize and compare common points and disparities among protocols for management of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer by leading international gynecological oncological societies. We therefore systematically report the parallel among the guidelines based on the various steps patients with endometrial cancer usually undergo. The comparison between American and European protocols revealed some relevant disparities, in particular regarding surgical staging, molecular biology application as a prognostic tool and follow up regimens. This could possibly cause differences in interpreting and applying protocols in clinical practice in small centers, leading to a lack of adherence to guidelines or even prompting a confusing mix of them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This research delves into the realm of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs), specifically focusing on a subtype with a high malignancy potential that is known as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs). By analyzing data from 113 patients across two European medical centers, this study assesses the effectiveness of two key guidelines, the Fukuoka consensus guidelines and the European evidence-based guidelines, in diagnosing severe disease stages in IPMNs. The findings reveal comparable diagnostic accuracies between the guidelines, highlighting the importance of personalized patient care and the potential indicators for surgical intervention. This study underscores the need for continuous research to refine these guidelines to improve patient outcomes and deepen our understanding of PCNs. Through this research, the authors seek to contribute to more accurate diagnosis and treatment strategies, ultimately influencing the broader medical community's approach to managing these complex cystic formations in the pancreas. This study addresses the critical need for the accurate diagnosis and management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs), which are pancreatic cystic neoplasm types holding a substantial potential for malignancy. It evaluates the diagnostic effectiveness of the Fukuoka consensus guidelines and the European evidence-based guidelines in detecting high-grade dysplasia/invasive carcinoma in IPMNs, utilizing a retrospective analysis of 113 patients from two European medical centers. The methods include a comparative analysis of clinical, radiological, and endoscopic ultrasonography data, alongside an assessment of guideline-driven diagnostic performance. The results demonstrate that both guidelines offer similar accuracy in identifying severe disease stages in IPMNs, with certain clinical markers—such as jaundice, solid mass presence, and an increase in CA 19-9 levels—being pivotal in predicting the need for surgical intervention. This study concludes that while both guidelines provide valuable frameworks for IPMN management, there is an inherent need for further research to refine these protocols and improve patient-specific treatment strategies. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on optimizing diagnostic and treatment paradigms for pancreatic cystic neoplasms, aiming to enhance clinical outcomes and patient care in this challenging medical field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]