Correlation of diaphragm surgical findings with preoperative CT scans in ovarian cancer

Objective: Correlation of diaphragm surgical findings in ovarian cancer patients with and without diaphragm metastases with pre-operative CT diaphragm findings to assess sensitivity and specificity for diaphragm disease. Material and Methods: A retrospective study of 120 ovarian cancer patients (60 with and 60 without diaphragm metastases at surgery), FIGO Stage IIIC or IV, undergoing cytoreductive surgery at Mayo Clinic, Arizona, between January 2000 and October 2014. All patients had preoperative imaging with CT scan of abdomen and pelvis including the lower lung fields. CTs were not reviewed retrospectively. Results: Among 60 patients with diaphragm metastases, preoperative CTs were positive for diaphragm disease in 17 patients, with a sensitivity rate of 28% (CI 95%: 0.17- 0.41). All 60 patients with no diaphragm metastases had negative CTs, with a specificity of 100% (CI 95%: 94.0%-100%). When analyzed by lesion size, CTs were negative in 66.7-80% of patients with diaphragm lesions ranging from 1-15 mm. There was a trend towards increased detection rate with increasing size of lesions, but it did not reach significance (p = 0.529). CT detection rate for single metastatic lesion was 18.2% (6/33) and for multiple lesions it was 25.9% (7/27). There was no difference for CT identification of right, left, or bilateral metastases (p = 0.399). The sensitivity and specificity of CT for pleural effusion was 100% (CI 95%: 72.2%-100%) and 88% (CI 95%: 76.2%- 94.4%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.680 (CI 95%: 55.3%-72.2%) for CT detection of diaphragm metastases and 0.957 (CI 95%: 79.9%-95.3%) for pleural effusions. Conclusion: CT has a low sensitivity and a high specificity for the prediction of diaphragm metastases in ovarian cancer. The size, location, and number of diaphragm lesions do not significantly improve CT detection rate.

Ovarian cancer; Diaphragm; CT scan.

[1] Fanfani F., Fagotti A., Gallota V., Ercoli A., Pacelli F., Constantini B., et al.: “Upper abdominal surgery in advanced and recurrent ovarian cancer: Role of diaphragmatic surgery. Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Mar;116:497-501.

[2] Nougaret S., Addley H.C., Colombo P.E., Fujii S., Al Sharif S.S., Tirumani S.H., Jardon K., Sala E., Reinhold C.: “Ovarian carcinomatosis: how the radiologist can help plan the surgical approach”. Radiographics, 2012, 32, 1775.

[3] Aletti G.D., Dowdy S.C., Gostout B.S., Jones M.B., Stanhope C.R., Wilson T.O., et al.: “Aggressive surgical effort and improved survival in advanced-stage ovarian cancer”. Obstet. Gynecol., 2006, 107, 77.

[4] Tsolakidis D., Amant F., Van Gorp T., Leunen K., Neven P., Vergote I.: “Diaphragmatic surgery during primary debulking in 89 patients with stage IIIB-IV epithelial ovarian cancer”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2010, 116, 489.

[5] Eisenhauer E.L., Abu-Rustum N.R., Sonoda Y., Levine D.A., Poynor E.A., Aghajanian C., et al.: “The addition of extensive upper abdominal surgery to achive optimal cytoreduction improves survival in patients with stages IIIC-IV epithelial ovarian cancer”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2006, 103, 1083.

[6] Dowdy S.C., Mullany S.A., Brand K.R., Huppert B.J., Cliby W.A.: “The utility of computed tomography scans in predicting suboptimal cytoreductive surgery in women with advanced ovarian carcinoma”. Cancer, 2004, 101, 346.

[7] Jung D.C., Kang S., Kang M.J., Park S.Y., Kim H.B.: “Multidetector CT predictors of incomplete resection in primary cytoreduction of patients with advanced ovarian cancer”. Eur. Radiol., 2010, 20, 100.

[8] Glaser G., Torres M., Kim B., Aletti G., Weaver A., Mariani A., et al.: “The use of CT findings to predict extent of tumor at primary surgery for ovarian cancer”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2013, 130, 280.

[9] Meyer J.I., Kennedy A.W., Friedman R., Ayoub A., Zepp R.C.: “Ovarian Carcinoma: value of CT in predicting success of debulking surgery”. Am. J. Roentgenol., 1995, 165, 875.

[10] Eisenkop S., Spirtos N.: “What are the current surgical objectives, strategies, and technical capabilities of gynecologic oncologists treating advanced epithelial ovarian cancer”. Gynecol. Oncol., 2008, 108, 287.

[11] Pannu H.K., Bristow R.E., Montz F.J., Fishman E.K.: “Multidetector CT of peritoneal carcinomatosis from ovarian cancer”. Radiographics, 2003, 23, 687.

[12] Funicelli L., Travaini L.L., Landoni F., Trifiro G., Bonello L., Bellomi M.: “Peritoneal carcinomatosis from ovarian cancer: the role of CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT”. Abdom. Imaging, 2010, 35, 701.

[13] Kyriazi S., Kaye S.B., deSouza N.M.: “Imaging ovarian cancer and peritoneal metastases—current and emerging techniques”. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol., 2010, 7, 381.