The sonographic prediction of invasive carcinoma in unilocular-solid ovarian cysts in premenopausal patients: a pilot study

Comparison of the diagnostic efficiency between the O-RADS US risk stratification system and doctors' subjective judgment

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficiency of Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and doctors' subjective judgment in diagnosing the malignancy risk of adnexal masses.

METHODS

This was an analysis of 616 adnexal masses between 2017 and 2020. The clinical findings, preoperative ultrasound images, and pathological diagnosis were recorded. Each adnexal mass was evaluated by doctors' subjective judgment and O-RADS by two senior doctors and two junior doctors. A mass with an O-RADS grade of 1 to 3 was a benign tumor, and a mass with an O-RADS grade of 4-5 was a malignant tumor. All outcomes were compared with the pathological diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of the 616 adnexal masses, 469 (76.1%) were benign, and 147 (23.9%) were malignant. There was no difference between the area under the curve of O-RADS and the subjective judgment for junior doctors (0.83 (95% CI: 0.79-0.87) vs. 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76-0.83), p = 0.0888). The areas under the curve of O-RADS and subjective judgment were equal for senior doctors (0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89) vs. 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.90), p = 0.8904). O-RADS had much higher sensitivity than the subjective judgment in detecting malignant tumors for junior doctors (84.4% vs. 70.1%) and senior doctors (91.2% vs. 81.0%). In the subgroup analysis for detecting the main benign lesions of the mature cystic teratoma and ovarian endometriosic cyst, the junior doctors' diagnostic accuracy was obviously worse than the senior doctors' on using O-RADS.

CONCLUSIONS

O-RADS had excellent performance in predicting malignant adnexal masses. It could compensate for the lack of experience of junior doctors to a certain extent. Better performance in discriminating various benign lesions should be expected with some complement.

Ultrasound Features and Clinical Outcome of Patients with Ovarian Masses Diagnosed during Pregnancy: Experience of Single Gynecological Ultrasound Center

(1) Background: The number of adnexal masses detected during pregnancy has increased due to the use of first-trimester screening and increasingly advanced maternal age. Despite their low risk of malignancy, other risks associated with these masses include torsion, rupture and labor obstruction. Correct diagnosis and management are needed to guarantee both maternal and fetal safety. Adnexal masses may be troublesome to classify during pregnancy due to the increased volume of the uterus and pregnancy-related hormonal changes. Management should be based on ultrasound examination to provide the best treatment. The aim of this study was to describe the ultrasound features of ovarian masses detected during pregnancy and to optimize and personalize their management with the expertise of gynecologists, oncologists and sonographers. (2) Methods: Clinical, ultrasound, histological parameters and type of management (surveillance vs. surgery) were retrospectively retrieved. Patient management, perinatal outcomes and follow-up were also evaluated. (3) Results: according to the literature, these masses are most frequently benign, ultrasound follow-up is the best management, and obstetric outcomes are not considerably influenced by the presence of adnexal masses. (4) Conclusions: the management of patients with ovarian masses detected during pregnancy should be based on ultrasound examination, and a centralization in referral centers for ovarian masses should be considered.

Validation of the diagnostic efficacy of O-RADS in adnexal masses

The aim of this study was to validate the performance of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data Systems (O-RADS) series models proposed by the American College of Radiology (ACR) in the preoperative diagnosis of adnexal masses (AMs). Two experienced sonologists examined 218 patients with AMs and gave the assessment results after the examination. Pathological findings were used as a reference standard. Of the 218 lesions, 166 were benign and 52 were malignant. Based on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, we defined a malignant lesion as O-RADS > 3 (i.e., lesions in O-RADS categories 4 and 5 were malignant). The area under the curve (AUC) of O-RADS (v2022) was 0.970 (95% CI 0.938-0.988), which wasn't statistically significantly different from the O-RADS (v1) combined Simple Rules Risk (SRR) assessment model with the largest AUC of 0.976 (95% CI 0.946-0.992) (p = 0.1534), but was significantly higher than the O-RADS (v1) (AUC = 0.959, p = 0.0133) and subjective assessment (AUC = 0.918, p = 0.0255). The O-RADS series models have good diagnostic performance for AMs. Where, O-RADS (v2022) has higher accuracy and specificity than O-RADS (v1). The accuracy and specificity of O-RADS (v1), however, can be further improved when combined with SRR assessment.

Application of Ultrasound Scores (Subjective Assessment, Simple Rules Risk Assessment, ADNEX Model, O-RADS) to Adnexal Masses of Difficult Classification

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound features help to differentiate benign from malignant masses, and some of them are included in the ultrasound (US) scores. The main aim of this work is to describe the ultrasound features of certain adnexal masses of difficult classification and to analyse them according to the most frequently used US scores.

METHODS

Retrospective studies of adnexal lesions are difficult to classify by US scores in women undergoing surgery. Ultrasound characteristics were analysed, and masses were classified according to the Subjective Assessment of the ultrasonographer (SA) and other US scores (IOTA Simple Rules Risk Assessment-SRRA, ADNEX model with and without CA125 and O-RADS).

RESULTS

A total of 133 adnexal masses were studied (benign: 66.2%, n:88; malignant: 33.8%, n:45) in a sample of women with mean age 56.5 ± 7.8 years. Malignant lesions were identified by SA in all cases. Borderline ovarian tumors (n:13) were not always detected by some US scores (SRRA: 76.9%, ADNEX model without and with CA125: 76.9% and 84.6%) nor were serous carcinoma (n:19) (SRRA: 89.5%), clear cell carcinoma (n:9) (SRRA: 66.7%) or endometrioid carcinoma (n:4) (ADNEX model without CA125: 75.0%). While most teratomas and serous cystadenomas have been correctly differentiated, other benign lesions were misclassified because of the presence of solid areas or papillae. Fibromas (n:13) were better identified by SA (23.1% malignancy), but worse with the other US scores (SRRA: 69.2%, ADNEX model without and with CA125: 84.6% and 69.2%, O-RADS: 53.8%). Cystoadenofibromas (n:10) were difficult to distinguish from malignant masses via all scores except SRRA (SA: 70.0%, SRRA: 20.0%, ADNEX model without and with CA125: 60.0% and 50.0%, O-RADS: 90.0%). Mucinous cystadenomas (n:12) were misdiagnosed as malignant in more than 15% of the cases in all US scores (SA: 33.3%, SRRA: 16.7%, ADNEX model without and with CA125: 16.7% and 16.7%, O-RADS:41.7%). Brenner tumors are also difficult to classify using all scores.

CONCLUSION

Some malignant masses (borderline ovarian tumors, serous carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma, endometrioid carcinomas) are not always detected by US scores. Fibromas, cystoadenofibromas, some mucinous cystadenomas and Brenner tumors may present solid components/papillae that may induce confusion with malignant lesions. Most teratomas and serous cystadenomas are usually correctly classified.

Ultrasound Features and Ultrasound Scores in the Differentiation between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses

BACKGROUND

Several ultrasound (US) features help ultrasound experts in the classification of benign vs. malignant adnexal masses. US scores serve in this differentiation, but they all have misdiagnoses. The main objective of this study is to evaluate what ultrasound characteristics are associated with malignancy influencing ultrasound scores.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of ultrasound features of adnexal lesions of women managed surgically. Ultrasound characteristics were analyzed, and masses were classified by subjective assessment of the ultrasonographer (SA) and other ultrasound scores (IOTA Simple Rules Risk Assessment SRRA, ADNEX model, and O-RADS).

RESULTS

Of a total of 187 adnexal masses studied, 134 were benign (71.7%) and 53 were malignant (28.3%). SA, IOTA SRRA, ADNEX model with or without CA125 and O-RADS had high levels of sensitivity (93.9%, 81.1%, 94.3%, 88.7%, 98.1%) but lower specificity (80.2%, 82.1%, 82.8%, 77.6%, 73.1%) with similar AUC (0.87, 0.87, 0.92, 0.90, 0.86). Ultrasound features significantly related with malignancy were the presence of irregular contour, absence of acoustic shadowing, vascularized solid areas, ≥1 papillae, vascularized septum, and moderate-severe ascites.

CONCLUSION

IOTA SRRA, ADNEX model, and O-RADS can help in the classification of benign and malignant masses. Certain ultrasound characteristics studied in ultrasound scores are associated with malignancy.

Ultrasound features of polypoid endometriosis: a case report and a short review of Literature

Introduction:

Polypoid endometriosis is a rare variant of endometriosis characterized by histological features resembling an endometrial polyp. Lesions frequently affect the ovaries presenting as adnexal masses which may mimic malignancy, with an extremely complex differential diagnosis due to the poor evidence reported in Literature.

Case description:

In this report, we describe the case of a 43 years old woman referred to pelvic transvaginal ultrasound examination for recurrent abdominal pain, in whom sonography revealed a pelvic mass with features highly suspicious for ovarian carcinoma. Surgical removal allowed histopathological diagnosis of polypoid endometriosis, with no signs of malignancy. At ultrasound examination, the lesion appeared as a multilocular-solid mass, with low-level echogenicity of cystic content, multiple papillary projections, and solid areas with high vascularization and apparent infiltration of the uterus. At retrospective review of the sonographic images after pathological examination, some features mirroring the histological architecture of polypoid endometriosis could be identified in the solid components of the mass: these included the hyperechoic appearance, the rounded outline of the intracystic projections, and the vascularization pattern with a single central vessel with branching.

Conclusions:

To date, this is the first work providing a detailed ultrasonographic description of polypoid endometriosis using shared terms and definitions and relating these findings with available evidence about radiologic and histopathologic features. The report shows how this condition could strongly mimick ovarian malignancy, though several sonographic features can be identified reflecting the histopathological patterns of those lesions.

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.

Imaging modalities in fertility preservation in patients with gynecologic cancers

Fertility preservation is an integral component of clinical decision-making and treatment design. However, the selection criteria on imaging for patients eligible for fertility preservation is still unclear. The present review aimed to summarize the main findings reported in both the literature and international guidelines on the role of imaging in the selection of patients for fertility preservation. A search strategy was developed and applied to PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE to identify previous citations reporting imaging and fertility preservation in patients with gynecological cancer. We also retrieved the published guidelines on the eligibility criteria for fertility-sparing treatment of gynecological neoplasms. A description of the internal multidisciplinary guidelines, clinically in use in our institution, is provided with representative clinical cases. The literature review revealed 1291 articles and 18 of these were selected for the analysis. Both ultrasound and MRI represented the primary imaging methods for selecting patients for fertility preservation in cervical and endometrial cancers. Eligibility criteria of fertility-sparing management in patients with cervical cancer were: tumor size <2 cm, tumor distance from the internal os >1 cm, and no parametrium invasion. For patients with endometrial cancer, these included no myometrial and cervical stroma invasion. Both ultrasound and MRI play a key role in characterizing adnexal masses. These modalities provide a useful tool in identifying small ovarian lesions, thus key in the surveillance of patients after fertility sparing surgery. However, efficacy in excluding disease beyond the ovary remains limited. This review provides an update of the literature and schematic outline for the counseling and management of patients with the desire for fertility preservation.

[Borderline Ovarian Tumours: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Imaging]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the place of imaging and the performance of different imaging techniques (transvaginal ultrasound with or without Doppler, scoring, CT, MRI) to differentiate benign tumour, borderline ovarian tumour (BOT) and malignant ovarian tumor. Differentiate the histological subtypes of BOT (serous, sero-mucinous, mucinous) and prediction in imaging of the possibility of conservative treatment.

METHODS

The research was carried out over the last 16 years using the terms "MeSH" based on the query of the Medline® database and supplemented by the review of references contained in the meta-analyzes, systematic reviews and original articles included.

RESULTS

Endo-vaginal and suprapubic ultrasonography is recommended for analysis of an ovarian mass (grade A). In the case of ultrasound by a referent, subjective analysis is the recommended technique (grade A). In case of echography by a non-referent, the use of "Simple Rules" is recommended (grade A) and should be best combined with subjective analysis to rejoin the performance of a sonographer refer (grade A). In cases of undetermined ovarian lesions in endovaginal ultrasound and suprapubic ultrasound, it is recommended to perform a pelvic MRI (grade A). The MRI protocol should include T2, T1, T1 sequences with fat saturation, diffusion, injected dynamics, and after gadolinium injection (grade B). To characterize an MRI-adnexal image, it is recommended to include a risk score for malignancy (ADNEX-MR/O-RADS) (grade C) in the report and to formulate an anatomopathological hypothesis (Grade C). The predictive signs of benignity in front of a cyst with endocystic vegetations are the low number, the small size, the presence of calcifications and the absence of Doppler flow in case of size greater than 10mm in echography (LP 4) and a curve of type 1 MRI (LP4). MRI is recommended for suspicious lesions of BOT in ultrasound (grade B) or indeterminate lesions in ultrasound (grade A). There is no data to support the usefulness of CT or PET-CT for BOT. Morphological criteria in ultrasound and MRI exist to differentiate BOT from invasive tumors regardless of grade (NP 2). Pelvic MRI is recommended to characterize a tumor suggestive of ultrasound BOT (grade C). No recommendations can be made about the use of combined ultrasound, biological, and menopausal status scores for the diagnosis of BOT. The diagnostic performance of imaging to detect peritoneal implants of BOT is not known. The assessment of the invasiveness of peritoneal implants of imaging BOT has not been evaluated. The association of macroscopic signs in MRI makes it possible to differentiate the different subtypes - serous, sero-mucinous and mucinous (intestinal type) - of BOT, despite the overlap of certain presentations (LP3). The analysis of macroscopic MRI signs must be performed to differentiate the different subtypes of TFO (grade C). No recommendation can be made on imaging prediction of the possibility of conservative BOT treatment.

New sonographic marker of borderline ovarian tumor: microcystic pattern of papillae and solid components

OBJECTIVE

To describe and evaluate the utility of a new sonographic microcystic pattern, which is typical of borderline ovarian tumor (BOT) papillary projections, solid component(s) and/or septa, as a new ultrasound marker that is capable of distinguishing BOT from other adnexal masses, and to present/obtain histologic confirmation.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we identified women with a histologic diagnosis of BOT following surgical resection who had undergone preoperative transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) examination. All images were reviewed for presence or absence of thin-walled, fluid-filled cluster(s) of 1-3-mm cystic formations, associated with solid component(s), papillary projections and/or septa. From the same cases, histopathologic slides of each BOT were examined for presence of any of these microcystic features which had been identified on TVS. To confirm that the microcystic TVS pattern is unique to BOTs, we also selected randomly from our ultrasound and surgical database 20 cases of epithelial ovarian cancer and 20 cases of benign cystadenoma, for review by the same pathologists. To confirm the novelty of our findings, we searched PubMed for literature published in the English language between 2010 and 2018 to determine whether the association between microcystic tissue pattern and BOT has been described previously.

RESULTS

Included in the final analysis were 62 patients (67 ovaries) with preoperative TVS and surgically confirmed BOT on pathologic examination. The mean patient age at surgery was 39.8 years. The mean BOT size at TVS was 60.7 mm. Of the 67 BOTs, 47 (70.1%) were serous, 15 (22.4%) were mucinous and five (7.5%) were seromucinous. We observed on TVS a microcystic pattern in the papillary projections, solid component(s) and/or septa in 60 (89.6%) of the 67 BOTs, including 46 (97.9%) of the 47 serous BOTs, 11 (73.3%) of the 15 mucinous BOTs and three (60.0%) of the five seromucinous BOTs. On microscopic evaluation, 60 (89.6%) of the 67 samples had characteristic 1-3-mm fluid-filled cysts similar to those seen on TVS. In seven cases there was a discrepancy between sonographic and histologic observation of a microcystic pattern. The 20 cystadenomas were mostly unilocular and/or multilocular and largely avascular. None of them or the 20 epithelial ovarian malignancies displayed microcystic characteristics, either on TVS or at histology. On review of 23 published articles in the English medical literature, containing 163 sonographic images of BOT, we found that, while all images contained it, there was no description of the microcystic tissue pattern.

CONCLUSION

We report herein a novel sonographic marker of BOT, a 'microcystic pattern' of BOT papillary projections, solid component(s) and/or septa. This was seen in the majority of both serous and mucinous BOT cases. Importantly, based on comparison of sonographic images and histopathology of benign entities and malignancies, the microcystic appearance seems to be unique to BOTs. No similar description has been published previously. Utilization of this new marker should help to identify BOT correctly, discriminating it from ovarian cancer and benign ovarian pathology, and should ensure appropriate clinical and surgical management. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Differences in ultrasound features of papillations in unilocular-solid adnexal cysts: a retrospective international multicenter study

OBJECTIVES

To identify ultrasound features of papillations or of the cyst wall that can discriminate between benign and malignant unilocular-solid cysts with papillations but no other solid components.

METHODS

From the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) database derived from seven ultrasound centers, we identified patients with an adnexal lesion described at ultrasonography as unilocular-solid with papillations but no other solid components. All patients had undergone transvaginal ultrasound between 1999 and 2007 or 2009 and 2012, by an experienced examiner following the IOTA research protocol. Information on four ultrasound features of papillations had been collected prospectively. Information on a further seven ultrasound features was collected retrospectively from electronic or paper ultrasound images of good quality. The histological diagnosis of the surgically removed adnexal lesion was considered the gold standard.

RESULTS

Of 204 masses included, 131 (64.2%) were benign, 42 (20.6%) were borderline tumors, 30 (14.7%) were primary invasive tumors and one (0.5%) was a metastasis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed the following ultrasound features to be associated independently with malignancy: height of the largest papillation, presence of blood flow in papillations, papillation confluence or dissemination, and shadows behind papillations. Shadows decreased the odds of malignancy, while the other features increased them.

CONCLUSION

We have identified ultrasound features that can help to discriminate between benign and malignant unilocular-solid cysts with papillations but no other solid components. Our results need to be confirmed in prospective studies. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Clinical and ultrasound characteristics of surgically removed adnexal lesions with largest diameter ≤ 2.5 cm: a pictorial essay

OBJECTIVES

To describe the ultrasound characteristics, indications for surgery and histological diagnoses of surgically removed adnexal masses with a largest diameter of ≤ 2.5 cm (very small tumors), to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of diagnosis of malignancy by subjective assessment of ultrasound images of very small tumors and to present a collection of ultrasound images of surgically removed very small tumors, with emphasis on those causing diagnostic difficulty.

METHODS

Information on surgically removed adnexal tumors with a largest diameter of ≤ 2.5 cm was retrieved from the ultrasound databases of seven participating centers. The ultrasound images were described using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis terminology. The original diagnosis, based on subjective assessment of the ultrasound images by the ultrasound examiner, was used to calculate the sensitivity and specificity of diagnosis of malignancy.

RESULTS

Of the 129 identified adnexal masses with largest diameter ≤ 2.5 cm, 104 (81%) were benign, 15 (12%) borderline malignant and 10 (8%) invasive tumors. The main indication for performing surgery was suspicion of malignancy in 22% (23/104) of the benign tumors and in all 25 malignant tumors. None of the malignant tumors was a unilocular cyst (vs 50% of the benign tumors), all malignancies contained solid components (vs 43% of the benign tumors), 80% of the borderline tumors had papillary projections (vs 21% of the benign tumors and 20% of the invasive malignancies) and all invasive tumors and 80% of the borderline tumors were vascularized on color/power Doppler examination (vs 44% of the benign tumors). The ovarian crescent sign was present in 85% of the benign tumors, 80% of the borderline tumors and 50% of the invasive malignancies. The sensitivity of diagnosis of malignancy by subjective assessment of ultrasound images was 100% (25/25) and the specificity was 86% (89/104). Excluding unilocular cysts, the specificity was 71% (37/52). Analysis of images illustrated the difficulty in distinguishing benign from borderline very small cysts with papillations and benign from malignant very small well vascularized (color score 3 or 4) solid adnexal tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Very small malignant tumors manifest generally accepted ultrasound signs of malignancy. Small unilocular cysts are usually benign, while small non-unilocular masses, particularly ones with solid components, incur a risk of malignancy and pose a clinical dilemma. © 2016 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Ultrasound diagnosis of serous surface papillary borderline ovarian tumor: A case series with a review of the literature

Serous surface papillary borderline ovarian tumors (SSPBOTs) are a rare morphologic variant of serous ovarian tumors that are typically confined to the ovarian surface, while the ovaries themselves tend to appear normal in size and shape. In this report, we describe the findings from five premenopausal women diagnosed with SSPBOTs, in whom ultrasound showed grossly normal ovaries that were partially or wholly covered with irregular solid tumors. In all five cases, histologic examination showed evidence of borderline serous tumors. These findings demonstrate that SSPBOTs can be diagnosed on a preoperative sonographic examination, which could facilitate conservative, fertility-sparing surgery in young women affected by this condition.

[Sonographic diagnosis of presumed benign ovarian tumors]

To discriminate ovarian lesions is of particular importance in gynecological practice. Two main problems need answers: discrimination of benign and malignant adnexal masses and choice of the appropriate surgical treatment if necessary. Nearly 2% of the adnexal masses are ovarian carcinomas or borderline tumors. It is now, well established that ultrasonography is the gold standard for ovarian cyst diagnosis. The purpose of this data was to review the literature and to establish, with the evidence base medicine model, which parameters and existing diagnostic models using ultrasound and Doppler perform best in the evaluation of adnexal masses. Transvaginal sonography has demonstrated considerable advantage over conventional transabdominal sonography. However, transparietal sonography is still useful in large tumors. Definition of the nomenclature and classification was done and should be used. Unilocular ovarian cyst characterization seems easy using sonography and Doppler. In front of complication, discrimination of such functional cyst may be difficult but spontaneous regression confirms usually the expectative management. Dermoid cysts and endometriomas seem to be easier to discriminate from other adnexal masses. Ultrasound and morphologic parameters have a sensitivity of about 90% and a specificity of 80%; that makes this exam the gold standard for ovarian masses diagnosis. Only 50% of ovarian masses are characterized by sonography. Scoring systems help to differentiate benign from malignant masses (sensitivity of about 90%). Logistic regression and models are good methods especially for LR1 and 2 and RMI and may be useful for malignancy prediction but are difficult to use in current practice. Expert diagnosis is a subjective but most important performing parameter. Any suspicious ovarian mass or not easily diagnosed mass requires sonography by an expert, which can first use all the techniques and the different parameters to discriminate benign and malignant tumors. An explicit report will help the physician to define the right attitude for an appropriate management. Six to 16% of adnexial masses are complex or not classified and will result in MRI prescription or surgery.