OBJECTIVES: To externally and prospectively validate the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules (SRs), Logistic Regression model 2 (LR2) and Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model in a Portuguese population, comparing these approaches with subjective assessment and the risk-of-malignancy index (RMI), as well as with each other. This study also aimed to retrospectively validate the IOTA two-step strategy, using modified benign simple descriptors (MBDs) followed by the ADNEX model in cases in which MBDs were not applicable. METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter diagnostic accuracy study conducted between January 2016 and December 2021 of consecutive patients with an ultrasound diagnosis of at least one adnexal tumor, who underwent surgery at one of three tertiary referral centers in Lisbon, Portugal. All ultrasound assessments were performed by Level-II or -III sonologists with IOTA certification. Patient clinical data and serum CA 125 levels were collected from hospital databases. Each adnexal mass was classified as benign or malignant using subjective assessment, RMI, IOTA SRs, LR2 and the ADNEX model (with and without CA 125). The reference standard was histopathological diagnosis. In the second phase, all adnexal tumors were classified retrospectively using the two-step strategy (MBDs + ADNEX). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios and overall accuracy were determined for all methods. Receiver-operating-characteristics curves were constructed and corresponding areas under the curve (AUC) were determined for RMI, LR2, the ADNEX model and the two-step strategy. The ADNEX model calibration plots were constructed using locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS). RESULTS: Of the 571 patients included in the study, 428 had benign disease and 143 had malignant disease (prevalence of malignancy, 25.0%), of which 42 had borderline ovarian tumor, 93 had primary invasive adnexal cancer and eight had metastatic tumors in the adnexa. Subjective assessment had an overall sensitivity of 97.9% and a specificity of 83.6% for distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions. RMI showed high specificity (95.6%) but very low sensitivity (58.7%), with an AUC of 0.913. The IOTA SRs were applicable in 80.0% of patients, with a sensitivity of 94.8% and specificity of 98.6%. The IOTA LR2 had a sensitivity of 84.6%, specificity of 86.9% and an AUC of 0.939, at a malignancy risk cut-off of 10%. At the same cut-off, the sensitivity, specificity and AUC for the ADNEX model with vs without CA 125 were 95.8% vs 98.6%, 82.5% vs 79.7% and 0.962 vs 0.960, respectively. The ADNEX model gave heterogeneous results for distinguishing between benign masses and different subtypes of malignancy, with the highest AUC (0.991) for discriminating benign masses from primary invasive adnexal cancer Stages II-IV, and the lowest AUC (0.696) for discriminating primary invasive adnexal cancer Stage I from metastatic lesion in the adnexa. The calibration plot suggested underestimation of the risk by the ADNEX model compared with the observed proportion of malignancy. The MBDs were applicable in 26.3% (150/571) of cases, of which none was malignant. The two-step strategy using the ADNEX model in the second step only, with and without CA 125, had AUCs of 0.964 and 0.961, respectively, which was similar to applying the ADNEX model in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: The IOTA methods showed good-to-excellent performance in the Portuguese population, outperforming RMI. The ADNEX model was superior to other methods in terms of accuracy, but interpretation of its ability to distinguish between malignant subtypes was limited by sample size and large differences in the prevalence of tumor subtypes. The IOTA MBDs are reliable in identifying benign disease. The two-step strategy comprising application of MBDs followed by the ADNEX model if MBDs are not applicable, is suitable for daily clinical practice, circumventing the need to calculate the risk of malignancy in all patients. © 2024 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
- MeSH
- antigen CA-125 krev MeSH
- diferenciální diagnóza MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- logistické modely MeSH
- nádory vaječníků * diagnostické zobrazování patologie klasifikace krev MeSH
- nemoci děložních adnex * diagnostické zobrazování MeSH
- prediktivní hodnota testů MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- reprodukovatelnost výsledků MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- ROC křivka MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- senzitivita a specificita MeSH
- ultrasonografie * metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
- validační studie MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Portugalsko MeSH
Cílem tohoto článku je seznámit odbornou veřejnost s našimi zkušenostmi s diagnostikou pomocí výpočetní tomografie tekutinových kolekcí u žen, u nichž je klinicky podezření na komplikovaný pánevní zánět či komplikaci po gynekologické operaci. Prezentujeme diagnostické rozpaky, které řeší radiolog včetně diferenciálních diagnóz. Zabýváme se přínosem pro odesílajícího gynekologa, diskutujeme i možnou diskrepanci mezi jeho očekáváním a výsledkem vyšetření.
The aim of this article is to acquaint the gynaecological public with our experience with the use of computed tomography in the diagnosis of fluid collections in women with clinical suspicion of complicated pelvic inflammation or a complication after gynaecological surgery. We present diagnostic dilemmas that radiologists deal with, including differential diagnoses. We also deal with the benefits for the referring gynaecologist, and we also discuss the possible discrepancy between his expectations and the result of the examination.
- MeSH
- diferenciální diagnóza MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- gynekologická onemocnění * diagnostické zobrazování patologie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nemoci děložních adnex diagnostické zobrazování patologie MeSH
- pánevní zánět diagnostické zobrazování patologie MeSH
- pooperační komplikace diagnostické zobrazování patologie MeSH
- tělesné sekrety diagnostické zobrazování MeSH
- tomografie emisní počítačová * metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- kazuistiky MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether vessel morphology depicted by three-dimensional (3D) power Doppler ultrasound improves discrimination between benignity and malignancy if used as a second-stage test in adnexal masses that are difficult to classify. METHODS: This was a prospective observational international multicenter diagnostic accuracy study. Consecutive patients with an adnexal mass underwent standardized transvaginal two-dimensional (2D) grayscale and color or power Doppler and 3D power Doppler ultrasound examination by an experienced examiner, and those with a 'difficult' tumor were included in the current analysis. A difficult tumor was defined as one in which the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) logistic regression model-1 (LR-1) yielded an ambiguous result (risk of malignancy, 8.3% to 25.5%), or as one in which the ultrasound examiner was uncertain regarding classification as benign or malignant when using subjective assessment. Even when the ultrasound examiner was uncertain, he/she was obliged to classify the tumor as most probably benign or most probably malignant. For each difficult tumor, one researcher created a 360° rotating 3D power Doppler image of the vessel tree in the whole tumor and another of the vessel tree in a 5-cm3 spherical volume selected from the most vascularized part of the tumor. Two other researchers, blinded to the patient's history, 2D ultrasound findings and histological diagnosis, independently described the vessel tree using predetermined vessel features. Their agreed classification was used. The reference standard was the histological diagnosis of the mass. The sensitivity of each test for discriminating between benign and malignant difficult tumors was plotted against 1 - specificity on a receiver-operating-characteristics diagram, and the test with the point furthest from the reference line was considered to have the best diagnostic ability. RESULTS: Of 2403 women with an adnexal mass, 376 (16%) had a difficult mass. Ultrasound volumes were available for 138 of these cases. In 79/138 masses, the ultrasound examiner was uncertain about the diagnosis based on subjective assessment, in 87/138, IOTA LR-1 yielded an ambiguous result and, in 28/138, both methods gave an uncertain result. Of the masses, 38/138 (28%) were malignant. Among tumors that were difficult to classify as benign or malignant by subjective assessment, the vessel feature 'densely packed vessels' had the best discriminative ability (sensitivity 67% (18/27), specificity 83% (43/52)) and was slightly superior to subjective assessment (sensitivity 74% (20/27), specificity 60% (31/52)). In tumors in which IOTA LR-1 yielded an ambiguous result, subjective assessment (sensitivity 82% (14/17), specificity 79% (55/70)) was superior to the best vascular feature, i.e. changes in the diameter of vessels in the whole tumor volume (sensitivity 71% (12/17), specificity 69% (48/70)). CONCLUSION: Vessel morphology depicted by 3D power Doppler ultrasound may slightly improve discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal tumors that are difficult to classify by subjective ultrasound assessment. For tumors in which the IOTA LR-1 model yields an ambiguous result, subjective assessment is superior to vessel morphology as a second-stage test. © 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
- MeSH
- adenom diagnostické zobrazování patofyziologie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory vaječníků diagnostické zobrazování patofyziologie MeSH
- nemoci děložních adnex diagnostické zobrazování patofyziologie MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- ROC křivka MeSH
- senzitivita a specificita MeSH
- ultrasonografie dopplerovská MeSH
- zobrazování trojrozměrné MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
- pozorovací studie MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Evropa MeSH