MRI plays important roles in endometrial and cervical cancer assessment, from detection to recurrent disease evaluation. Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common malignant tumor of the female genital tract in Western countries. EC patients are divided into risk categories based on histopathological tumor type, grade, and myometrial invasion depth. EC is surgically staged using the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) system. Since FIGO (2009) stage correlates with prognosis, preoperative staging is essential for tailored treatment. MRI reveals myometrial invasion depth, which correlates with tumor grade and lymph node metastases, and thus correlates with prognosis. Cervical cancer (CC) is the second most common cancer, and the third leading cause of cancer-related death among females in developing countries. The FIGO Gynecologic Oncology Committee recently revised its CC staging guidelines, allowing staging based on imaging and pathological findings when available. The revised FIGO (2018) staging includes node involvement and thus enables both therapy selection and evaluation, prognosis estimation, and calculation of end results. MRI can accurately assess prognostic indicators, e.g., tumor size, parametrial invasion, pelvic sidewall, and lymph node invasion. Despite these important roles of MRI, radiologists still face challenges due to the technical and interpretation pitfalls of MRI during all phases of endometrial and cervical cancer evaluation. Awareness of mimics that can simulate both cancers is critical. With careful application, functional MRI with DWI and DCE sequences can help establish a correct diagnosis, although it is sometimes necessary to perform biopsy and histopathological analysis.

Objective The aim of the Female Pelvic Imaging Working Group of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) was to develop imaging staging guidelines for vulvar cancer and to propose standardised MRI protocols and reporting. Methods The guidelines recommended from the ESUR in this article resulted from a questionnaire analysis regarding imaging staging of vulvar cancer that was answered by all members of the Female Pelvic Imaging Working Group. Only the answers with an agreement equal to or more than 80% were considered. Additionally, the literature was reviewed to complement and further support our conclusions. Results The critical review of the literature and consensus obtained among experts allows for recommendations regarding imaging staging guidelines, patient preparation, MRI protocol, and a structured MRI report. Conclusions Standardising image acquisition techniques and MRI interpretation reduces ambiguity and ultimately improves the contribution of radiology to the staging and management of patients with vulvar cancer. Moreover, structured reporting assists with the communication of clinically relevant information to the referring physician.

No abstract