First International Consensus Report on Adnexal Masses: Management Recommendations

Neural network-derived multivariate index assay demonstrates effective clinical performance in longitudinal monitoring of ovarian cancer risk

OBJECTIVE

We recently characterized the clinical performance of a multivariate index assay (MIA3G) to assess ovarian cancer risk for adnexal masses at initial presentation. This study evaluated how MIA3G varies when applied longitudinally to monitor risk during clinical follow-up.

METHOD

The study evaluated women presenting with adnexal masses from eleven centers across the US. Patients received an initial blood draw at enrollment and at the standard-of-care follow-up visits. MIA3G was determined for all visits but physicians did not have access to MIA3G scores to determine clinical management. The primary outcome was the relative change value (RCV) of MIA3G over the period of clinical observation.

RESULTS

A total of 510 patients of 785 enrolled met study criteria. Of these, 30.8% had a second, 25.4% a third and 22.2% a fourth blood draw following initial collection. The median duration from initial draw was 131 d to second draw, 301.5 d to the third draw and 365.5 d to the fourth draw. MIA3G RCV of >50% was observed in 22-26% patients, whereas 70-75% patients had MIA3G RCV >5%. An empirical baseline RCV of 56% - transformed to 1 in logarithmic scale - was calculated from averaging RCVs of all patients who had no malignancy risk after 210 days. RCV > 1 log was associated with higher incidence of surgical intervention (29.6%) compared to RCV < 1 log (16.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in MI3AG does not change the accuracy of the test for excluding malignancy, while marked changes may be associated with a slightly higher likelihood of surgical intervention. In addition to MIA3G score itself, the MIA3G RCV may be important for clinical management.

Liability, risks, and recommendations for ultrasound use in the diagnosis of obstetrics diseases

This literature review will summarize the liability issues, risks, and ultrasound recommendations for diagnosing obstetrics diseases. One liability issue is related to misdiagnosis or failure to detect abnormalities during an ultrasound examination. Ultrasound images can be subjective interpretations, and errors may occur due to factors such as operator skill, equipment limitations, or fetal positioning. Another liability concern is related to the potential adverse effects of ultrasound exposure on both the mother and fetus. While extensive research has shown that diagnostic ultrasound is generally safe when used appropriately, there are still uncertainties regarding long-term effects. Some studies suggest a possible association between prolonged or excessive exposure to ultrasound waves and adverse outcomes such as low birth weight, developmental delays, or hearing impairment. Additionally, obtaining informed consent from patients is crucial in mitigating liability risks. Patients should be informed about the purpose of the ultrasound examination, its benefits, limitations, potential risks (even if minimal), and any alternative diagnostic options available. This ensures that patients know the procedure and can make informed decisions about their healthcare. Proper documentation helps establish a clear record of the care provided and can serve as evidence in any legal disputes.

Predictive accuracy and reproducibility of the O-RADS US scoring system among sonologists with different training levels

PURPOSE

To investigate the predictive performance and reproducibility of Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) system in evaluating adnexal masses between sonologists with varying levels of expertise.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective study conducted between May 2019 and May 2020, which included 147 adnexal mases with pathological results. Four sonologists with varying experiences independently assigned an O-RADS US category to each adnexal mass twice. The intra- and inter-observer agreement was assessed using weighted kappa values. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV) were assessed for each sonologist.

RESULTS

Of the 147 adnexal mases, 115 (78.2%) lesions were benign and 32 (21.8%) lesions were malignant. Considering O-RADS > 3 as a predictor for adnexal malignancy, the predictive accuracies of the four sonologists were excellent, with AUCs ranging from 0.831 to 0.926. The predictive accuracies of O-RADS US by experienced sonologists were significantly higher compared to inexperienced sonologists (all P values < 0.005). The O-RADS US presented high sensitivity and NPV value for each sonologist. With regard to the reproducibility of O-RADS, the intra- and inter-observer agreement among experienced sonologists performed better than inexperienced sonologists.

CONCLUSION

O-RADS showed difference in the predictive accuracy and reproducibility in the evaluation of adnexal masses among sonologists with different levels of expertise. Training is required for inexperienced sonologists before the generalization of O-RADS classification system in clinical practice.

Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Parameters in the Evaluation of Adnexal Masses with Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Ultrasound

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine whether incorporating qualitative parameters of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) can increase the accuracy of adnexal lesion assessments with Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound category 4 or 5.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients with adnexal masses who underwent conventional ultrasound (US) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examinations between January and August of 2020. The study investigators reviewed and analyzed the morphological features of each mass before categorizing the US images independently according to the O-RADS system published by the American College of Radiology. In the CEUS analysis, the initial time and intensity of enhancement involving the wall and/or septation of the mass were compared with the uterine myometrium. Internal components of each mass were observed for signs of enhancement. The sensitivity, specificity, and Youden's index were calculated as the contrast variables and O-RADS.

RESULTS

Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the best cutoff value was higher than O-RADS 4. When information on the extent of enhancement was applied to selectively upgrade O-RADS category 4 and selectively downgrade O-RADS category 5, the overall sensitivity increased to 90.2%, while the level of specificity (91.3%) remained the same.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating additional information from CEUS with respect to the extent of enhancement helped to improve the sensitivity of O-RADS category 4 and 5 masses without loss of specificity.

Deep convolutional neural networks for multiple histologic types of ovarian tumors classification in ultrasound images

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate and validate the performance of deep convolutional neural networks when discriminating different histologic types of ovarian tumor in ultrasound (US) images.

Material and methods

Our retrospective study took 1142 US images from 328 patients from January 2019 to June 2021. Two tasks were proposed based on US images. Task 1 was to classify benign and high-grade serous carcinoma in original ovarian tumor US images, in which benign ovarian tumor was divided into six classes: mature cystic teratoma, endometriotic cyst, serous cystadenoma, granulosa-theca cell tumor, mucinous cystadenoma and simple cyst. The US images in task 2 were segmented. Deep convolutional neural networks (DCNN) were applied to classify different types of ovarian tumors in detail. We used transfer learning on six pre-trained DCNNs: VGG16, GoogleNet, ResNet34, ResNext50, DensNet121 and DensNet201. Several metrics were adopted to assess the model performance: accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, FI-score and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results

The DCNN performed better in labeled US images than in original US images. The best predictive performance came from the ResNext50 model. The model had an overall accuracy of 0.952 for in directly classifying the seven histologic types of ovarian tumors. It achieved a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 99.2% for high-grade serous carcinoma, and a sensitivity of over 90% and a specificity of over 95% in most benign pathological categories.

Conclusion

DCNN is a promising technique for classifying different histologic types of ovarian tumors in US images, and provide valuable computer-aided information.

A real-world comparison of the clinical and economic utility of OVA1 and CA125 in assessing ovarian tumor malignancy risk

Aim: This largest-of-its-kind study evaluated the clinical utility of CA125 and OVA1, commonly used as ovarian tumor markers for assessing the risk of malignancy. The research focused on the ability and utility of these tests to reliably predict patients at low risk for ovarian cancer. Clinical utility endpoints were 12-month maintenance of benign mass status, reduction in gynecologic oncologist referral, avoidable surgical intervention and associated cost savings. Materials & methods: This was a multicenter retrospective review of data from electronic medical records and administrative claims databases. Patients receiving a CA125 or OVA1 test between October 2018 and September 2020 were identified and followed for 12 months using site-specific electronic medical records to assess tumor status and utilization outcomes. Propensity score adjustment was used to control for confounding variables. Payer allowed amounts from Merative MarketScan Research Databases were used to estimate 12-month episode-of-care costs per patient, including surgery and other interventions. Results: Among 290 low-risk OVA1 patients, 99.0% remained benign for 12 months compared with 97.2% of 181 low-risk CA125 patients. The OVA1 cohort exhibited 75% lower odds of surgical intervention in the overall sample of patients (Adjusted OR: 0.251, p ≤ 0.0001), and 63% lower odds of gynecologic oncologist utilization among premenopausal women (Adjusted OR: 0.37, p = 0.0390) versus CA125. OVA1 demonstrated significant savings in surgical interventions ($2486, p ≤ 0.0001) and total episode-of-care costs ($2621, p ≤ 0.0001) versus CA125. Conclusion: This study underscores the utility of a reliably predictive multivariate assay for assessing ovarian cancer risk. For patients assessed at low risk of ovarian tumor malignancy, OVA1 is associated with a significant reduction in avoidable surgeries and substantial cost savings per patient. OVA1 is also associated with a significant reduction in subspecialty referrals for low-risk premenopausal patients.

Ultrasound examination, MRI, or ROMA for discriminating between inconclusive adnexal masses as determined by IOTA Simple Rules: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the best second-step approach for discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses classified as inconclusive by International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Simple Rules (IOTA-SR).

METHODS

Single-center prospective study comprising a consecutive series of patients diagnosed as having an adnexal mass classified as inconclusive according to IOTA-SR. All women underwent Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) analysis, MRI interpreted by a radiologist, and ultrasound examination by a gynecological sonologist. Cases were clinically managed according to the result of the ultrasound expert examination by either serial follow-up for at least 1 year or surgery. Reference standard was histology (patient was submitted to surgery if any of the tests was suspicious) or follow-up (masses with no signs of malignancy after 12 months were considered benign). Diagnostic performance of all three approaches was calculated and compared. Direct cost analysis of the test used was also performed.

RESULTS

Eighty-two adnexal masses in 80 women (median age 47.6 years, range 16 to 73 years) were included. Seventeen patients (17 masses) were managed expectantly (none had diagnosis of ovarian cancer after at least 12 months of follow-up) and 63 patients (65 masses) underwent surgery and tumor removal (40 benign and 25 malignant tumors). Sensitivity and specificity for ultrasound, MRI, and ROMA were 96% and 93%, 100% and 81%, and 24% and 93%, respectively. The specificity of ultrasound was better than that for MRI (p=0.021), and the sensitivity of ultrasound was better than that for ROMA (p<0.001), sensitivity was better for MRI than for ROMA (p<0.001) and the specificity of ROMA was better than that for MRI (p<0.001). Ultrasound evaluation was the most effective and least costly method as compared with MRI and ROMA.

CONCLUSION

In this study, ultrasound examination was the best second-step approach in inconclusive adnexal masses as determined by IOTA-SR, but the findings require confirmation in multicenter prospective trials.

Ovarian Masses: The Value of Acoustic Shadowing on Ultrasound Examination

Adnexal lesions are a common finding in women and pose a clinical challenge since ovarian cancer is a highly lethal disease. However, most adnexal masses are benign, benefiting from a more conservative approach. In preoperative assessment, transvaginal ultrasound plays a key role in evaluating morphologic features that correlate with the risk of malignancy. The acoustic shadow is the loss of echo behind sound-absorbing components, such as calcifications or fibrous tissues, which are predominantly found in benign lesions. However, recognizing the acoustic shadow is a difficult skill to master, and its usefulness may be underappreciated.

Clinical value of O-RADS combined with serum CA125 and HE4 for the diagnosis of ovarian tumours

BACKGROUND

Ovarian tumors (OTs) are common gynecological tumors in women. It is very important to correctly distinguish benign and malignant OTs.

PURPOSE

To assess the diagnostic performance of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and evaluate the clinical value of O-RADS combined with serum carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) and human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) in differentiating benign from malignant OTs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 431 cases including pathology and clinical data. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn, and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated.

RESULTS

In premenopausal women, O-RADS and O-RADS combined with serum CA125 and HE4 showed sensitivity at 92.2% and 94.8%, specificity at 91.8% and 93.4%, and accuracy at 91.9% and 93.8%, respectively. In postmenopausal women, the sensitivity of O-RADS, O-RADS combined with serum CA125 and HE4 was 94.8% and 95.8%, specificity was 83.9% and 93.6%, and accuracy was 90.5% and 95.6%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of O-RADS combined with CA125 and HE4 in premenopausal and postmenopausal women were higher than that of O-RADS (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

O-RADS has high diagnostic performance in OTs. When O-RADS is combined with CA125 and HE4 in the diagnosis of OTs, the sensitivity and specificity are improved, which is helpful to improve the diagnostic efficiency of OTs and has high clinical application value.

O-RADS MRI After Initial Ultrasound for Adnexal Lesions: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) ultrasound (US) and MRI risk stratification systems were developed by an international group of experts in adnexal imaging to aid radiologists in assessing adnexal lesions. The goal of imaging is to appropriately triage patients with adnexal lesions. US is the first-line imaging modality for assessment, whereas MRI can be used as a problem-solving tool. Both US and MRI can accurately characterize benign lesions such as simple cysts, endometriomas, hemorrhagic cysts, and dermoid cysts, avoiding unnecessary or inappropriate surgery. In patients with a lesion that does not meet criteria for one of these benign diagnoses, MRI can further characterize the lesion with an improved specificity for cancer and the ability to provide a probable histologic subtype in the presence of certain MRI features. This allows personalized treatment, including avoiding overly extensive surgery or allowing fertility-sparing procedures for suspected benign, borderline, or low-grade tumors. When MRI findings indicate a risk of an invasive cancer, patients can be expeditiously referred to a gynecologic oncologic surgeon. This narrative review provides expert opinion on the utility of multiparametric MRI when using the O-RADS US and MRI management systems.

Incidental discovery of a giant ovarian cystadenoma

Introduction

Serous cystadenomas account for approximately 25% of benign ovarian tumors in patients of childbearing age. Their growth is insidious, and the diagnosis can be difficult as they are often asymptomatic, Patients with serous cystadenoma often experience symptoms only if the lesion is twisted or has a mass effect because of its size.This was the case in our patient, whose cough and low back pain prompted her To consult a doctor, which led to the definitive diagnosis and treatment.

Materials and methods

We report a case of a patient admitted for strangulated umbilical hernia with fortuitous discovery of a giant ovarian mass in the P35 visceral emergency department at the CHU ibn rochd hospital in Casablanca, Morocco.

Results

the patient were operated in the emergency room, approached by laparotomy with the exploration we found umbilical hernia with a 6 cm long neck and necrotic bowel content a left latero-uterine mass of 40 cm of solid-cystic aspect and tube and right ovary without abnormalities and uterus of normal size the patient had an Segmental resection of 10 cm at 2.60 m from the ADJ and 1 m from the JIC with T-T grelo-grelic anastomosis and a left adnexectomy with a left latero-uterine mass of 45 cm and Epipoic and parietal peritoneum biopsy and Examination of the patient's spicemen showed serous cystadenoma weighing 10 kg and measuring 30 × 36*20 cm adjoining a tubular formation measuring 11 × 10*5 cm with bowel resection showed ischemic and hemorrhagic necrosis related to the occlusion with acellular ascites fluid.

Discussion

Very Cystadenomas There are 2 types: Pleudomucinous cystadenomas or mucoid cysts, These are the most frequent neoplastic cysts of the ovary which are, in general, lumpy, multilocular, producing a gelatinous substance [8]. Their consistency is variable, some taut and firm, others semi-solid, spongy, thick, hollowed out “honeycomb” parts, which contain thick, stringy mucus. The coloration is variable: grayish white when the wall is thick, translucent in some places, with yellowish or white reflections, blue-black or reddish if there is spilled blood, grayish if there is cholesterol. on the other hand Serous cystadenomas or papillary cysts A little less frequent than mucoid cysts. Usually unilocular or paucicular, round or relatively flat, they contain protein-rich serous fluid. The coloration varies according to the content and thickness of the wall: light yellow or brown if the wall is thin, purplish red if there is blood, greyish white if the wall is thick. Consistency clearly fluctuates on the whole but can be hard in places, semi-solid, if there are abundant vegetations inside.

Conclusion

Very large tumors have become curiosities in industrialized countries where the health care system is well developed. On the other hand, they are not rare in developing countries. The delay in diagnosis is most often due to the patient herself who does not consult out of ignorance or refusal of her pathology. But it can happen, and this is serious.

•

The largest tumors found in the human species are essentially represented by human species are essentially represented by ovarian tumors.

•

Its diagnosis is still very difficult.

•

The treatment Serous cystadenomas geant is in most cases surgical.

•

The diagnosis Serous cystadenomas is histological.

Management of the Adnexal Mass: Considerations for the Family Medicine Physician

Ovarian cancer is the most deadly gynecological cancer, so proper assessment of a pelvic mass is necessary in order to determine which are at high risk for malignancy and should be referred to a gynecologic oncologist. However, in a family medicine setting, evaluation and treatment of these masses can be challenging due to a lack of resources. A number of risk assessment tools are available to family medicine physicians, including imaging techniques, imaging systems, and blood-based biomarker assays each with their respective pros and cons, and varying ability to detect malignancy in pelvic masses. Effective utilization of these assessment tools can inform the care pathway for patients which present with an adnexal mass, such as expectant management for those with a low risk of malignancy, or referral to a gynecologic oncologist for surgery and staging, for those at high risk of malignancy. Triaging patients to the appropriate care pathway improves patient outcomes and satisfaction, and family medicine physicians can play a key role in this decision-making process.

External Validation of O-RADS US Risk Stratification and Management System

Background The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US risk stratification and management system (O-RADS US) was designed to improve risk assessment and management of ovarian and adnexal lesions. Validation studies including both surgical and nonsurgical treatment as the reference standard remain lacking. Purpose To externally validate O-RADS US in women who underwent either surgical or nonsurgical treatment and to determine if incorporating acoustic shadowing as a benign finding improves diagnostic performance. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included consecutive women who underwent pelvic US between August 2015 and April 2017 at a tertiary referral oncology center. Two independent readers blinded to clinical and histologic outcome assigned an O-RADS risk category and an International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model risk of malignancy score to assessable lesions. Reference standards were surgical histopathology or 2-year imaging follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate performance of the O-RADS US, ADNEX, and modified O-RADS models incorporating acoustic shadowing. Results In total, 227 women (mean age, 52 years ± 16 [SD]) with 262 ovarian or adnexal lesions were evaluated. Of these lesions, 187 (71%) were benign and 75 (29%) were malignant. The proportion of malignancy was 0% (0 of 100) for O-RADS 2, 3% (one of 32) for O-RADS 3, 35% (22 of 63) for O-RADS 4, and 78% (52 of 67) for O-RADS 5. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for O-RADS and ADNEX was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.94) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92, 0.97; P = .01), respectively. The addition of acoustic shadowing as a benign finding improved O-RADS AUC to 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.96; P = .01). Use of O-RADS 4 as a threshold yielded a sensitivity of 99% (74 of 75; 95% CI: 96, 100) and a specificity of 70% (131 of 187; 95% CI: 64, 77). Conclusion In a tertiary referral oncology center, the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System US risk stratification and management system enabled accurate distinction of benign from malignant ovarian and adnexal lesions. Adding acoustic shadowing as a benign finding improved its diagnostic performance. © RSNA, 2022 See also the editorial by Levine in this issue.

Deep Learning Prediction of Ovarian Malignancy at US Compared with O-RADS and Expert Assessment

Background Deep learning (DL) algorithms could improve the classification of ovarian tumors assessed with multimodal US. Purpose To develop DL algorithms for the automated classification of benign versus malignant ovarian tumors assessed with US and to compare algorithm performance to Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and subjective expert assessment for malignancy. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included consecutive women with ovarian tumors undergoing gray scale and color Doppler US from January 2019 to November 2019. Histopathologic analysis was the reference standard. The data set was divided into training (70%), validation (10%), and test (20%) sets. Algorithms modified from residual network (ResNet) with two fusion strategies (feature fusion [hereafter, DL_feature] or decision fusion [hereafter, DL_decision]) were developed. DL prediction of malignancy was compared with O-RADS risk categorization and expert assessment by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis in the test set. Results A total of 422 women (mean age, 46.4 years ± 14.8 [SD]) with 304 benign and 118 malignant tumors were included; there were 337 women in the training and validation data set and 85 women in the test data set. DL_feature had an AUC of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.97) for classifying malignant from benign ovarian tumors, comparable with O-RADS (AUC, 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85, 0.97; P = .88) and expert assessment (AUC, 0.97; 95% CI: 0.91, 0.99; P = .07), and similar to DL_decision (AUC, 0.90; 95% CI: 0.82, 0.96; P = .29). DL_decision, DL_feature, O-RADS, and expert assessment achieved sensitivities of 92%, 92%, 92%, and 96%, respectively, and specificities of 80%, 85%, 89%, and 87%, respectively, for malignancy. Conclusion Deep learning algorithms developed by using multimodal US images may distinguish malignant from benign ovarian tumors with diagnostic performance comparable to expert subjective and Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System assessment. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Ovarian Cancer Detection in Average-Risk Women: Classic- versus Nonclassic-appearing Adnexal Lesions at US

Background Several US risk stratification schemas for assessing adnexal lesions exist. These multiple-subcategory systems may be more multifaceted than necessary for isolated adnexal lesions in average-risk women. Purpose To explore whether a US-based classification scheme of classic versus nonclassic appearance can be used to help appropriately triage women at average risk of ovarian cancer without compromising diagnostic performance. Materials and Methods This retrospective multicenter study included isolated ovarian lesions identified at pelvic US performed between January 2011 and June 2014, reviewed between September 2019 and September 2020. Lesions were considered isolated in the absence of ascites or peritoneal implants. Lesions were classified as classic or nonclassic based on sonographic appearance. Classic lesions included simple cysts, hemorrhagic cysts, endometriomas, and dermoids. Otherwise, lesions were considered nonclassic. Outcomes based on histopathologic results or clinical or imaging follow-up were recorded. Diagnostic performance and frequency of malignancy were calculated. Frequency of malignancy between age groups was compared using the χ² test, and Poisson regression was used to explore relationships between imaging features and malignancy. Results A total of 970 isolated lesions in 878 women (mean age, 42 years ± 14 [SD]) were included. The malignancy rate for classic lesions was less than 1%. Of 970 lesions, 53 (6%) were malignant. The malignancy rate for nonclassic lesions was 32% (33 of 103) when blood flow was present and 8% (16 of 194) without blood flow (P < .001). For women older than 60 years, the malignancy rate was 50% (10 of 20 lesions) when blood flow was present and 13% (five of 38) without blood flow (P = .004). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the classic-versus-nonclassic schema was 93% (49 of 53 lesions), 73% (669 of 917 lesions), 17% (49 of 297 lesions), and 99% (669 of 673 lesions), respectively, for detection of malignancy. Conclusion Using a US classification schema of classic- or nonclassic-appearing adnexal lesions resulted in high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of malignancy in ovarian cancer. The highest risk of cancer was in isolated nonclassic lesions with blood flow in women older than 60 years. © RSNA, 2022 See also the editorial by Baumgarten in this issue.

Conservative Management of Asymptomatic Adnexal Masses Classified as Benign by the IOTA ADNEX Model: A Prospective Multicenter Portuguese Study

This prospective multicentric study aiming to determine the incidence of complications (malignant transformation, torsion or rupture) during conservative management of adnexal masses was performed in two Portuguese tertiary referral hospitals. It included ≥18-year-old, non-pregnant patients with asymptomatic adnexal masses (associated IOTA ADNEX risk of malignancy < 10%) sonographically diagnosed between January 2016 and December 2020. Conservative patient management consisted of serial clinical and ultrasound assessment up to 60 months of follow-up, spontaneous resolution of the formation or surgical excision (median follow-up: 17.8; range 9–48 months). From the 573 masses monitored (328 premenopausal and 245 postmenopausal adnexal masses), no complications were observed in 99.5%. The annual lesion growth rates and increases in morphological complexity were similar in the premenopausal and postmenopausal patients. Spontaneous resolution, evidenced in 16.4% of the patients, was more common in the premenopausal group (p < 0.05). Surgical intervention was performed in 18.4% of the cases; one borderline and one invasive FIGO IA stage cancer were diagnosed. There was an isolated case of ovary torsion (0.17%). These data support conservative management as a safe option for sonographically benign, stable and asymptomatic adnexal masses before and after menopause and highlight the need for expedite treatment of symptomatic or increased-morphological-complexity lesions.

Management of adnexal mass: A comparison of five national guidelines

OBJECTIVES

General gynecologists are often the first to face a newly diagnosed adnexal mass. Bothering mass symptoms, fertility issues, and the effect of a possible surgical intervention on fertility in term of mechanical factor and ovarian follicular reserve are all considerations that should be accounted for. This study summarizes and compares five different adnexal mass management guidelines, enabling clinicians to peruse consensus and controversy issues, thus choosing the optimal management method.

DESIGN

We retrieved, reviewed and compared the most recent national guidelines of adnexal mass management from the national societies of the United States (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists), England (the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists), Canada (the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada), Australia (the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners), and France (French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians).

RESULTS

There is a broad consensus regarding the role of transvaginal ultrasound as part of the initial evaluation of an adnexal mass and the radiological characteristics suggesting it being malignant. The role of transabdominal ultrasound or doppler mode is controversial. The use of MRI in cases of indeterminate adnexal masses is widely accepted. Ultrasound-guided aspiration is generally not recommended. There is a broad consensus that CA-125 should not be used as an ovarian cancer disease screening tool, though its role in the initial evaluation of adnexal masses is controversial. Risk prediction models are generally accepted, particularly the 'International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules' and the 'Risk of Malignancy Index'.

CONCLUSION

Adnexal mass management national guidelines, though similar, had noticeable variations in the content, references cited, and recommendations made. While this variation might raise a concern as to the reproducibility of synthesizing literature, it can help practitioners present all spectra of recommendations and available data.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, including imaging techniques, biomarkers and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

Guideline No. 403: Initial Investigation and Management of Adnexal Masses

OBJECTIVES

To aid primary care physicians, emergency medicine physicians, and gynaecologists in the initial investigation of adnexal masses, defined as lumps that appear near the uterus or in or around ovaries, fallopian tubes, or surrounding connective tissue, and to outline recommendations for identifying women who would benefit from a referral to a gynaecologic oncologist for further management.

INTENDED USERS

Gynaecologists, obstetricians, family physicians, general surgeons, emergency medicine specialists, radiologists, sonographers, nurses, medical learners, residents, and fellows.

TARGET POPULATION

Adult women 18 years of age and older presenting for the evaluation of an adnexal mass.

OPTIONS

Women with adnexal masses should be assessed for personal risk factors, history, and physical findings. Initial evaluation should also include imaging and laboratory testing to triage women for management of their care either by a gynaecologic oncologist or as per SOGC guideline no. 404 on the initial investigation and management of benign ovarian masses.

EVIDENCE

A search of PubMed, Cochrane Wiley, and the Cochrane systematic reviews was conducted in January 2018 for English-language materials involving human subjects published since 2000 using three sets of terms: (i) ovarian cancer, ovarian carcinoma, adnexal disease, ovarian neoplasm, adnexal mass, fallopian tube disease, fallopian tube neoplasm, ovarian cyst, and ovarian tumour; (ii) the above terms in combination with predict neoplasm staging, follow-up, and staging; and (iii) the above two sets of terms in combination with ultrasound, tumour marker, CA 125, CEA, CA19-9, HE4, multivariable-index-assay, risk-of-ovarian-malignancy-algorithm, risk-of-malignancy-index, diagnostic imaging, CT, MRI, and PET. Relevant evidence was selected for inclusion in descending order of quality of evidence as follows: meta-analyses, systematic reviews, guidelines, randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, observational studies, non-systematic reviews, case series, and reports. Additional articles were identified through cross-referencing the identified reviews. The total number of studies identified was 2350, with 59 being included in this review.

VALIDATION METHODS

The content and recommendations were drafted and agreed upon by the authors. The Executive and Board of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology of Canada reviewed the content and submitted comments for consideration. The Board of Directors of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada approved the final draft for publication. The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology framework (Table A1 of Online Appendix A). See Table A2 of Online Appendix A for the interpretation of strong and weak recommendations. The summary of findings is available upon request.

BENEFITS, HARMS, COSTS

Adnexal masses are common, and guidelines on how to triage them and manage the care of patients presenting with adnexal masses will continue to guide the practice of primary care providers and gynaecologists. Ovarian cancer outcomes are improved when initial surgery is performed by a gynaecologic oncologist, likely as a result of complete surgical staging and optimal cytoreduction. Given these superior outcomes, guidelines to assist in the triage of adnexal masses and the referral and management of the care of patients with an adnexal mass are critical.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES)

RECOMMENDATIONS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES).

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours, including imaging techniques, biomarkers and prediction models.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised.

Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when a consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements.

This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumours and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors

The European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) group, and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, including imaging techniques, biomarkers, and prediction models. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE nominated a multidisciplinary international group, including expert practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and management of patients with ovarian cancer (19 experts across Europe). A patient representative was also included in the group. To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, the current literature was reviewed and critically appraised. Preliminary statements were drafted based on the review of the relevant literature. During a conference call, the whole group discussed each preliminary statement and a first round of voting was carried out. Statements were removed when a consensus among group members was not obtained. The voters had the opportunity to provide comments/suggestions with their votes. The statements were then revised accordingly. Another round of voting was carried out according to the same rules to allow the whole group to evaluate the revised version of the statements. The group achieved consensus on 18 statements. This Consensus Statement presents these ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE statements on the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors and the assessment of carcinomatosis, together with a summary of the evidence supporting each statement.

Comparison of the Diagnostic Performances of Ultrasound-Based Models for Predicting Malignancy in Patients With Adnexal Masses

Aim

This study aimed to compare different ultrasound-based International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) prediction models, namely, the Simple Rules (SRs) the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) models, and the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI), for the pre-operative diagnosis of adnexal mass.

Methods

This single-centre diagnostic accuracy study involved 486 patients. All ultrasound examinations were analyzed and the prediction models were applied. Pathology was the clinical reference standard. The diagnostic performances of prediction models were measured by evaluating receiver-operating characteristic curves, sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratios.

Results

To discriminate benign and malignant tumors, areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) for ADNEX models were 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92–0.96) with CA125 and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91–0.96) without CA125, which were significantly higher than the AUCs for RMI I-III: 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83–0.90), 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80–0.86), and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78–0.86), (all P < 0.0001). At a cut-off of 10%, the ADNEX model with CA125 had the highest sensitivity (0.93; 95% CI: 0.87–0.97) compared with the other models. The SRs model achieved a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.86–0.97) and a specificity of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82–0.89) when inconclusive diagnoses (11.7%) were classified as malignant.

Conclusion

ADNEX and SRs models were excellent at characterising adnexal masses which were superior to the RMI in Chinese patients.

State of the art in abdominal MRI structured reporting: a review

In the management of several abdominal disorders, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has the potential to significantly improve patient's outcome due to its diagnostic accuracy leading to more appropriate treatment choice. However, its clinical value heavily relies on the quality and quantity of diagnostic information that radiologists manage to convey through their reports. To solve issues such as ambiguity and lack of comprehensiveness that can occur with conventional narrative reports, the adoption of structured reporting has been proposed. Using a checklist and standardized lexicon, structured reports are designed to increase clarity while assuring that all key imaging findings related to a specific disorder are included. Unfortunately, structured reports have their limitations too, such as risk of undue report simplification and poor template plasticity. Their adoption is also far from widespread, and probably the ideal balance between radiologist autonomy and report consistency of has yet to be found. In this article, we aimed to provide an overview of structured reporting proposals for abdominal MRI and of works assessing its value in comparison to conventional free-text reporting. While for several abdominal disorders there are structured templates that have been endorsed by scientific societies and their adoption might be beneficial, stronger evidence confirming their imperativeness and added value in terms of clinical practice is needed, especially regarding the improvement of patient outcome.

Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Lexicon for MRI: A White Paper of the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data Systems MRI Committee

MRI is used in the evaluation of ovarian and adnexal lesions. MRI can further characterize lesions seen on ultrasound to help decrease the number of false-positive lesions and avoid unnecessary surgery in benign lesions. Currently, the reporting of ovarian and adnexal findings on MRI is inconsistent because of the lack of standardized descriptor terminology. The development of uniform reporting descriptors can lead to improved interpretation agreement and communication between radiologists and referring physicians. The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data Systems MRI Committee was formed under the direction of the ACR to create a standardized lexicon for adnexal lesions with the goal of improving the quality and consistency of imaging reports. This white paper describes the consensus process in the creation of a standardized lexicon for ovarian and adnexal lesions for MRI and the resultant lexicon.

O-RADS for Ultrasound: A User's Guide, From the AJR Special Series on Radiology Reporting and Data Systems

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) is a lexicon and risk stratification tool designed for the accurate characterization of adnexal lesions and is essential for optimal patient management. O-RADS is a recent addition to the American College of Radiology (ACR) reporting and data systems and consists of ultrasound (US) and MRI arms. Since most ovarian or adnexal lesions are first detected with US, O-RADS US is considered the primary assessment tool. Application of O-RADS US is recommended whenever a nonphysiologic lesion is encountered. Lesion characterization may be streamlined by use of an algorithmic approach focused on relevant features and an abbreviated version of the lexicon. Resources to expedite O-RADS US categorization and determination of a management recommendation include easy online access to the ACR color-coded risk stratification scorecards and an O-RADS US calculator that is available as a smartphone app. Reporting should be concise and include relevant features for risk stratification that adhere to lexicon terminology. Technical considerations include optimization of gray-scale and color Doppler technique and performance of problem-solving maneuvers to help avoid common pitfalls. This review provides a user-friendly summary of O-RADS US with practical tips for everyday clinical use.

Improving the performance of IOTA simple rules: sonographic assessment of adnexal masses with resource-effective use of a magnetic resonance scoring (ADNEX MR scoring system)

PURPOSE

To compare the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules, simple rules risk ultrasound models, alone or in combination with magnetic resonance (MR) score to predict malignancy in women with adnexal masses.

METHODS

171 women with adnexal masses were included from February 2014 to February 2016. 120 women had histopathological diagnosis obtained from surgery or percutaneous biopsy. The other 51 women were submitted to surveillance with ultrasound (US) for at least 1 year. Patients were examined with US and MR. US reports were rendered using IOTA systems. We compared five diagnostic approaches, aimed at diagnosing women with malignant tumors among those with adnexal masses: We calculated the performance and net benefits (decision curve analysis) for five distinct diagnostic approaches: (1) US simple rules (SR), (2) simple rules risk score (SRRisk), (3) US SR followed by subjective assessment (SA) of indeterminate cases, (4) SR followed by MR score for the indeterminate cases, and (5) MR score for all women.

RESULTS

The MR score for all patients was the approach that yielded the best-standardized net benefit regardless of the risk threshold. However, referring women with indeterminate masses on SR to MR score yielded the second-best net benefit.

CONCLUSION

Although this study leaves no doubt about the superiority of MR score over US-based methods for the discrimination of malignant tumors in women with adnexal masses, restricting the use of MR score only to women with indeterminate masses on US SR is a safe, appropriate way to triage women with adnexal masses.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Clinically Suspected Adnexal Mass, No Acute Symptoms

There are approximately 9.1 pelvic surgeries performed for every histologically confirmed adnexal malignancy in the United States, compared to 2.3 surgeries per malignancy (in oncology centers) and 5.9 surgeries per malignancy (in other centers) in Europe. An important prognostic factor in the long-term survival in patients with ovarian malignancy is the initial management by a gynecological oncologist. With high accuracy of imaging for adnexal mass characterization and consequent appropriate triage to subspecialty referral, the better use of gynecologic oncology can improve treatment outcomes. Ultrasound, including transabdominal, transvaginal, and duplex ultrasound, combined with MRI with contrast can diagnose adnexal masses as benign with specific features (ie, functional masses, dermoid, endometrioma, fibroma, pedunculated fibroid, hydrosalpinx, peritoneal inclusion cyst, Tarlov cyst), malignant, or indeterminate. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Guideline No. 404: Initial Investigation and Management of Benign Ovarian Masses

OBJECTIVE

To provide recommendations for a systematic approach to the initial investigation and management of a benign ovarian mass and facilitate patient referral to a gynaecologic oncologist for management.

INTENDED USERS

Obstetricians, gynaecologists, family physicians, internists, nurse practitioners, radiologists, general surgeons, medical students, medical residents, fellows, and other health care providers.

TARGET POPULATION

Women ≥18 years of age presenting for evaluation of an ovarian mass (including simple and unilocular cystic masses, endometriomas, dermoids, fibromas, and hemorrhagic cysts) who are not acutely symptomatic and without known genetic predisposition to ovarian cancer.

OUTCOMES

This guideline aims to encourage conservative management and help reduce unnecessary surgery and long-term health complications, maintain fertility, and decrease operative costs and improve overall patient care and outcomes by providing criteria for referral of patients with ultrasound imaging findings suggestive of a malignant mass to a gynaecologic oncologist.

EVIDENCE

Databases searched: Medline, Cochrane, and PubMed. Medical terms used: benign asymptomatic and symptomatic ovarian cysts, adnexal masses, oophorectomy, ultrasound diagnosis of cysts, simple ultrasound rules, surgical and medical therapies for cysts, screening for ovarian cancer, ovarian torsion, and menopause. Initial search was completed by 2017 and updated in 2018. Exclusion criteria were malignant ovarian cystic masses, endometriosis therapies, and other adnexal pathologies unrelated to the ovary.

VALIDATION METHODS

The content and recommendations were drafted and agreed upon by the authors. The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada's Board of Directors approved the final draft for publication. The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology framework.

BENEFITS, HARMS, COSTS

Implementation of the recommendations could reduce costs due to unnecessary surgeries and hospitalizations and reduce lost work days and the risk of loss of fertility, early menopause, and surgical complications.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES)

RECOMMENDATIONS (GRADE RATINGS IN PARENTHESES).

Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents Can Accurately Classify Benign Ovarian Tumors Using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Rules

OBJECTIVES

Recognition of benign versus malignant tumors is essential in gynecologic ultrasound (US). The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) rules have been proposed as part of resident US training. The objective of this study was to examine whether they could be accurately used by obstetrics and gynecology residents in Rwanda.

METHODS

Patients undergoing explorative laparotomy for adnexal masses at the University Teaching Hospital of Kigali were included. Before the study, a didactic lecture on the IOTA rules for classifying adnexal masses was performed. Preoperative transabdominal US examinations were performed by residents at different levels of training, who were blinded to the results of prior US examinations. The IOTA classification was compared to the final pathologic diagnosis.

RESULTS

There were 72 patients who underwent 116 US examinations. Only 15.5% of US examinations were considered inconclusive. First-year residents (12) correctly diagnosed 18 of 20 masses (90%) as benign and 4 of 4 as malignant. Second-year residents (9) classified 29 of 29 masses correctly. Third-year residents (10) accurately identified 21 of 22 (95.5%) as benign and 5 of 5 as malignant. Fourth-year residents (13) accurately identified 11 of 12 (91.7%) as benign and 6 of 6 as malignant. Therefore, 74 of 78 tumors (94.9%) considered benign by IOTA rules were confirmed by histologic results. Similarly, all 20 tumors classified as malignant were confirmed. Overall, the sensitivities to diagnose benign and malignant tumors by the IOTA rules were 83.3% and 100%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 94.9%. There were no significant differences noted between residency years.

CONCLUSIONS

All levels of Rwandan obstetrics and gynecology residents were able to use the IOTA rules to accurately distinguish benign from malignant tumors.

Performance of Selected Models for Predicting Malignancy in Ovarian Tumors in Relation to the Degree of Diagnostic Uncertainty by Subjective Assessment With Ultrasound

OBJECTIVES

The study's main aim was to evaluate the relationship between the performance of predictive models for differential diagnoses of ovarian tumors and levels of diagnostic confidence in subjective assessment (SA) with ultrasound. The second aim was to identify the parameters that differentiate between malignant and benign tumors among tumors initially diagnosed as uncertain by SA.

METHODS

The study included 250 (55%) benign ovarian masses and 201 (45%) malignant tumors. According to ultrasound findings, the tumors were divided into 6 groups: certainly benign, probably benign, uncertain but benign, uncertain but malignant, probably malignant, and certainly malignant. The performance of the risk of malignancy index, International Ovarian Tumor Analysis assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa model, and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis logistic regression model 2 was analyzed in subgroups as follows: SA-certain tumors (including certainly benign and certainly malignant) versus SA-probable tumors (probably benign and probably malignant) versus SA-uncertain tumors (uncertain but benign and uncertain but malignant).

RESULTS

We found a progressive decrease in the performance of all models in association with the increased uncertainty in SA. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the risk of malignancy index, logistic regression model 2, and assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa model decreased between the SA-certain and SA-uncertain groups by 20%, 28%, and 20%, respectively. The presence of solid parts and a high color score were the discriminatory features between uncertain but benign and uncertain but malignant tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies are needed that focus on the subgroup of ovarian tumors that are difficult to classify by SA. In cases of uncertain tumors by SA, the presence of solid components or a high color score should prompt a gynecologic oncology clinic referral.

Scoring systems for the evaluation of adnexal masses nature: current knowledge and clinical applications

Adnexal masses are a common finding in women, with 20% of them developing at least one pelvic mass during their lifetime. There are more than 30 different subtypes of adnexal tumours, with multiple different subcategories, and the correct characterisation of the pelvic masses is of paramount importance to guide the correct management. On that basis, different algorithms and scoring systems have been developed to guide the clinical assessment. The first scoring system implemented into the clinical practice was the Risk of Malignancy Index, which combines ultrasound evaluation, menopausal status, and serum CA-125 levels. Today, current guidelines regarding female patients with adnexal masses include the application of International Ovarian Tumours Analysis simple rules, logistic regression model 1 (LR1) and LR2, OVERA, cancer ovarii non-invasive assessment of treating strategy, and assessment of Different Neoplasias in the adnexa. In this scenario, the choice of the scoring system for the discrimination between benign and malignant ovarian tumours can be complex when approaching patients with adnexal masses. This review aims to summarise the available evidence regarding the different scoring systems to provide a complete overview of the topic.

Evaluation of adnexal tumours in the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis system in reference to histopathological results

Aim of the study

To retrospectively evaluate how the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules used in ultrasound examinations estimate the probability of malignant and benign tumour occurrence in the studied population.

Material and methods

The study was performed on a group of 425 patients with ovarian tumours operated in the Clinic of Surgical and Oncological Gynecology at the Medical University of Lodz in the years 2014-2015. Adnexal tumours were rated according to IOTA simple rules, classifying them as probably malignant, probably benign, or unclassified. The results of the study were compared with final histopathological results. The statistical analysis was performed using STATISTICA 13 PL with Medical Pack.

Results

We analysed data on n = 43 (11%) patients with malignant, n = 346 (86%) patients with benign, and n = 12 (3%) patients with borderline tumours, respectively. Malignant tumour patients were significantly older (mean age 61.0 ±11.6 vs. 43.6 ±16.2 years, p< 0.001), had higher BMI (mean 27.3 ±7.0 vs. 25.2 ±5.2, p< 0.05), more pregnancies (median 2 vs. 1, p = 0.001), and higher cancer antigen 125 (CA 125) concentrations (median 251.5 vs. 18.5, p< 0.001) than patients with a benign tumour. Also, they more often suffered from diabetes mellitus (19% vs. 8%, p = 0.02) and arterial hypertension (60% vs. 42%, p< 0.01) than benign tumour patients.

Conclusions

In our study, IOTA performance in predicting or ruling out a malignant tumour was highly satisfactory and similar to that of CA 125. Both the methods may be complementary and used to assess the risk of malignant vs. benign ovarian neoplasm, although the context of other clinical variables may also be important.

The Abnormal Ovary: Evolving Concepts in Diagnosis and Management

Ovarian lesions are common and require a consistent approach to diagnosis and management for best patient outcomes. In the past 20 years, there has been an evolution in the approach to abnormal ovarian lesions, with increasing emphasis on reducing surgery for benign disease, standardizing terminology, assessing risk of malignancy through use of evidence-based scoring systems, and triaging suspicious abnormalities to dedicated oncology centers. This article provides an evidence-based review of how these changes in diagnosis and management of ultrasound-detected abnormal ovarian lesions have occurred. Current recommended practices are summarized. The current literature on transvaginal screening for ovarian cancer also is reviewed and summarized.

O-RADS US Risk Stratification and Management System: A Consensus Guideline from the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Committee

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) US risk stratification and management system is designed to provide consistent interpretations, to decrease or eliminate ambiguity in US reports resulting in a higher probability of accuracy in assigning risk of malignancy to ovarian and other adnexal masses, and to provide a management recommendation for each risk category. It was developed by an international multidisciplinary committee sponsored by the American College of Radiology and applies the standardized reporting tool for US based on the 2018 published lexicon of the O-RADS US working group. For risk stratification, the O-RADS US system recommends six categories (O-RADS 0-5), incorporating the range of normal to high risk of malignancy. This unique system represents a collaboration between the pattern-based approach commonly used in North America and the widely used, European-based, algorithmic-style International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the Adnexa model system, a risk prediction model that has undergone successful prospective and external validation. The pattern approach relies on a subgroup of the most predictive descriptors in the lexicon based on a retrospective review of evidence prospectively obtained in the IOTA phase 1-3 prospective studies and other supporting studies that assist in differentiating management schemes in a variety of almost certainly benign lesions. With O-RADS US working group consensus, guidelines for management in the different risk categories are proposed. Both systems have been stratified to reach the same risk categories and management strategies regardless of which is initially used. At this time, O-RADS US is the only lexicon and classification system that encompasses all risk categories with their associated management schemes.

The power of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm considering menopausal status: a comparison with CA 125 and HE4

Objective

To identify the power of tumor markers for predicting ovarian cancer according to menopausal status.

Methods

The medical records of 876 women with ovarian cysts were retrospectively reviewed. Cancer antigen 125 (CA 125), human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), and Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) were analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity, and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses of these tumor markers were evaluated.

Results

The sensitivity of ROMA was 66.7% and the specificity was 86.8% to detect ovarian malignancy. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to menopausal status: premenopause (n=532, 60.7%) and postmenopause (n=344, 39.3%). For diagnostic accuracy, ROMA was lower than HE4 in premenopausal women (82.7% vs. 91.4%) and lower than CA 125 in postmenopausal women (86.9% vs. 88.7%). The ROC curve analysis revealed that the power of ROMA was not significantly better than that of HE4 in premenopausal women (area under the curve [AUC], 0.731 vs. 0.732, p=0.832), and it was also not significantly better than that of CA 125 in postmenopausal women (AUC, 0.871 vs. 0.888, p=0.440).

Conclusion

The discrimination power of tumor markers for ovarian cancer was different according to menopausal status. In predicting ovarian malignancy, ROMA was neither superior to HE4 in premenopausal women nor superior to CA 125 in postmenopausal women.

Methods of Assessing Ovarian Masses: International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Approach

There are many diagnostic methods to assist clinicians in assessing adnexal masses on ultrasound. After suggesting a standardized terminology and measurement technique to evaluate adnexal masses, the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group has developed different strategies such as the Simple Rules and Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model, which have been shown to outperform other available methods. Besides differentiating between benign neoplasms and malignancies, the ADNEX model can also give the predicted risk for different subtypes of malignant adnexal masses, which is clinically very relevant for guiding patient management.

Diagnostic accuracy of gynecology imaging reporting and data system in evaluation of adnexal lesions

Background:

Considering the increasing incidence rate of ovarian cancer in worldwide and the utility of Gynecologic Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS) in diagnosing malignant adnexal lesions such as ovarian cancer, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of this reporting system in differentiating between malignant and benign adnexal lesions.

Materials and Methods:

In this cross-sectional study, women with suspected adnexal lesions were enrolled. For differentiating of malignant adnexal lesions, Grade II and III of GI-RADS system were classified as low risk for malignancy and Grades IV and V as high risk. Results of histopathologic diagnosis were compared with the results of the mentioned GI-RADS system classification, and the diagnosed accuracy of the system was determined. Patients who did not have histopathologic diagnosis were followed up.

Results:

In this study, 197 women with suspected adnexal lesions were evaluated. Frequency of GI-RADS II, III, IV, and V were 34.5% (69 cases), 38.0% (76 cases), 19.5% (39 cases), and 6.5% (13 cases), respectively. According to the low- and high-risk classification of GI-RADS, 72.5% were classified as GI-RADS II and III and 26% as GI-RADS IV and V, respectively. Definitive histopathologic diagnosis was reported for 158 cases. Histopathologic evaluation indicated that 12 (7.6%) of the masses were malignant and 146 (92.6%) were benign. Comparing with the histopathologic diagnosis, the GI-RADS system sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio (LR), and negative LR were 91.6%, 80.82%, 28.2%, 99.1%, 4.77, and 0.10, respectively. The accuracy of the scoring system was 81.64%.

Conclusion:

Our findings indicated that using GI-RADS, we could quantify the risk of malignancy by such a structured as well as simple reporting system so that the system could be useful for clinicians for performing an appropriate clinical management.

Investigation of treatment efficacy of 10% povidone–iodine sclerotherapy on ovarian cyst diameter: an experimental study

Background/aim

The purpose of this study was toinvestigate the effects of 10% povidone–iodine (PI) sclerotherapyon ovarian cyst diameter through an experimental study.

Materials and methods

To be able to create ovarian cysts, right unilateral salpingectomy was performed on 20 Wistar albino rats. One month after the operation, the abdomens of all rats were reopened. Sixteen rats with macroscopic ovarian cysts were divided randomly into 2 groups consisting of 8 rats. Group 1 (G1): the cyst content was only aspirated. Group 2 (G2): the ovarian cyst was aspirated and then the cystic cavity was irrigated with PI. Abdomens of all rats were closed and 1 month later they were reopened. Tissues of the right ovaries of the rats were embedded in paraffin blocks for histopathological examination. Follicle count, fibrosis, and congestion were evaluated under a light microscope.

Results

For G1, there was no difference in cyst diameters before and after aspiration. In G2, a decrease was observed in cyst diameter. There was no difference in ovarian reserve between the 2 groups. When compared with G1, an increase in fibrosis and congestion was determined in G2.

Conclusion

Sclerotherapyinto the ovarian cyst for a 5-min period using 10% PI reduces cyst diameter without any change in ovarian reserve.

Development and validation of a model that includes two ultrasound parameters and the plasma D-dimer level for predicting malignancy in adnexal masses: an observational study

Background

Pre-operative discrimination of malignant from benign adnexal masses is crucial for planning additional imaging, preparation, surgery and postoperative care. This study aimed to define key ultrasound and clinical variables and develop a predictive model for calculating preoperative ovarian tumor malignancy risk in a gynecologic oncology referral center. We compared our model to a subjective ultrasound assessment (SUA) method and previously described models.

Methods

This prospective, single-center observational study included consecutive patients. We collected systematic ultrasound and clinical data, including cancer antigen 125, D-dimer (DD) levels and platelet count. Histological examinations served as the reference standard. We performed univariate and multivariate regressions, and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) to assess the optimal model. Data were split into 2 subsets: training, for model development (190 observations) and testing, for model validation (n = 100).

Results

Among 290 patients, 52% had malignant disease, including epithelial ovarian cancer (72.8%), metastatic disease (14.5%), borderline tumors (6.6%), and non-epithelial malignancies (4.6%). Significant variables were included into a multivariate analysis. The optimal model, included three independent factors: solid areas, the color score, and the DD level. Malignant and benign lesions had mean DD values of 2.837 and 0.354 μg/ml, respectively. We transformed established formulae into a web-based calculator (http://gin-onc-calculators.com/gynonc.php) for calculating the adnexal mass malignancy risk. The areas under the curve (AUCs) for models compared in the testing set were: our model (0.977), Simple Rules risk calculation (0.976), Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) (0.972), Logistic Regression 2 (LR2) (0.969), Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) 4 (0.932), SUA (0.930), and RMI3 (0.912).

Conclusions

Two simple ultrasound predictors and the DD level (also included in a mathematical model), when used by gynecologist oncologist, discriminated malignant from benign ovarian lesions as well or better than other more complex models and the SUA method. These parameters (and the model) may be clinically useful for planning adequate management in the cancer center. The model needs substantial validation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5629-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Adnexal tumors in menopausal women: surgery or surveillance?

Asymptomatic ovarian tumors in menopausal women do not always require surgical removal. Experts recommend an initial evaluation with transvaginal ultrasound to help characterize the tumor's malignant risk. Low-risk tumors can be monitored with ultrasound, whereas high-risk tumors should be referred to a gynecologic oncologist. Indeterminate tumors require secondary testing with the strategies outlined in this Practice Pearl.

Pre-operative assessment of intra-abdominal disease spread in epithelial ovarian cancer: a comparative study between ultrasound and computed tomography

Objective

To compare the diagnostic performance of ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) for detecting pelvic and abdominal tumor spread in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

Methods

An observational cohort study of 93 patients (mean age 57.6 years) with an ultrasound diagnosis of adnexal mass suspected of malignancy and confirmed histologically as epithelial ovarian cancer was undertaken. In all cases, transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasound as well as CT scans were performed to assess the extent of the disease within the pelvis and abdomen prior to surgery. The exploration was systematic, analyzing 12 anatomical areas. All patients underwent surgical staging and/or cytoreductive surgery with an initial laparoscopy for assessing resectability. The surgical and pathological findings were considered as the 'reference standard'. Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound and CT scanning were calculated for the different anatomical areas and compared using the McNemar test. Agreement between ultrasound and CT staging and the surgical stage was estimated using the weighted kappa index.

Results

The tumorous stage was International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I in 26 cases, stage II in 11 cases, stage III in 47 cases, and stage IV in nine cases. Excluding stages I and IIA cases (n=30), R0 (no macroscopic residual disease) was achieved in 36 women (62.2%), R1 (macroscopic residual disease <1 cm) was achieved in 13 women (25.0%), and R2 (macroscopic residual disease >1 cm) debulking surgery occurred in three women (5.8%). Eleven patients (11.8%) were considered not suitable for optimal debulking surgery during laparoscopic assessment. Overall sensitivity of ultrasound and CT for detecting disease was 70.3% and 60.1%, respectively, and specificity was 97.8% and 93.7%, respectively. The agreement between radiological stage and surgical stage for ultrasound (kappa index 0.69) and CT (kappa index 0.70) was good for both techniques. Overall accuracy to determine tumor stage was 71% for ultrasound and 75% for CT.

Conclusion

Detailed ultrasound examination renders a similar diagnostic performance to CT for assessing pelvic/abdominal tumor spread in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

Risk of Malignant Ovarian Cancer Based on Ultrasonography Findings in a Large Unselected Population

IMPORTANCE

The risk of malignant ovarian cancer associated with simple cysts is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the risk of ovarian cancer based on ultrasonographic characteristics of ovarian masses, including simple cysts, in a large unselected population.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a nested case-control study of patients enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington, a large integrated health care system in Washington State. Participants were 72 093 women who underwent pelvic ultrasonography between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2008. Analysis was completed in April 2017.

EXPOSURES

Ultrasonographic characteristics of ovarian masses measured in 1043 women, and also, using weights derived from the sampling strategy, estimated frequencies for the entire cohort.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Malignant ovarian cancer, identified through December 31, 2011, by cancer registry linkage.

RESULTS

Among 210 women who were diagnosed as having ovarian cancer, 49 were younger than 50 years, and 161 were 50 years or older. Ultrasonography findings were predictive of cancer (C statistic, 0.89). The risk of cancer was significantly elevated in women with complex cysts or solid masses, with likelihood ratios relative to women with normal ovaries ranging from 8 to 74 and the 3-year risk of cancer ranging from 9 to 430 cases per 1000 women based on patient age and ultrasonography findings. In contrast, the 23.8% of women younger than 50 years and the 13.4% of women 50 years or older with simple cysts were not at a significantly increased risk of ovarian cancer compared with women with normal ovaries. Likelihood ratios associated with the detection of a simple cyst were 0.00 in women younger than 50 years (no cancers were identified) and 0.10 (95% CI, 0.01-0.48) in women 50 years or older, and the absolute 3-year risk of cancer ranged from 0 to 0.5 cases per 1000 women.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

According to this study, the ultrasonographic appearance of ovarian masses is strongly associated with a woman's risk of ovarian cancer. Simple cysts are not associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer, whereas complex cysts or solid masses are associated with a significantly increased risk of ovarian cancer.