| 1. |
- Testa, A. C., et al.
(författare)
-
Intravenous contrast ultrasound examination using contrast-tuned imaging (CnTI (TM)) and the contrast medium SonoVue (R) for discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses with solid components
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. - : Wiley. - 1469-0705 .- 0960-7692. ; 34:6, s. 699-710
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To determine whether intravenous contrast ultrasound examination is superior to gray-scale or power Doppler ultrasound for discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses with complex ultrasound morphology. Methods In an international multicenter study, 134 patients with an ovarian mass with solid components or a multilocular cyst with more than 10 cyst locules, underwent a standardized transvaginal ultrasound examination followed by contrast examination using the contrast-tuned imaging technique and intravenous injection of the contrast medium SonoVue (R). Time intensity curves were constructed, and peak intensity, area under the intensity curve, time to peak, sharpness and half wash-out time were calculated. The sensitivity and specificity with regard to malignancy were calculated and receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves were drawn for gray-scale, power Doppler and contrast variables and for pattern recognition (subjective assignment of a certainly benign, probably benign, uncertain or malignant diagnosis, using gray-scale and power Doppler ultrasound findings). The gold standard was the histological diagnosis of the surgically removed tumors. Results After exclusions (surgical removal of the mass > 3 months after the ultrasound examination, technical problems), 72 adnexal masses with solid components were used in our statistical analyses. The values for peak contrast signal intensity and area under the contrast signal intensity curve in malignant tumors were significantly higher than those in borderline tumors and benign tumors, while those for the benign and borderline tumors were similar. The area under the ROC curve of the best contrast variable with regard to diagnosing borderline or invasive malignancy (0.84) was larger than that of the best gray-scale (0.75) and power Doppler ultrasound variable (0.79) but smaller than that of pattern recognition (0.93). Conclusion Findings on ultrasound contrast examination differed between benign and malignant tumors but there was a substantial overlap in contrast findings between benign and borderline tumors. It appears that ultrasound contrast examination is not superior to conventional ultrasound techniques, which also have difficulty in distinguishing between benign and borderline tumors, but can easily differentiate invasive malignancies from other tumors. Copyright (C) 2009 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
|
|
| 2. |
- Van Holsbeke, C., et al.
(författare)
-
Prospective external validation of the 'ovarian crescent sign' as a single ultrasound parameter to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal pathology
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. - : Wiley. - 1469-0705 .- 0960-7692. ; 36:1, s. 81-87
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the 'ovarian crescent sign' (OCS) - a rim of normal ovarian tissue seen adjacent to an ipsilateral adnexal mass as a sonographic feature to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Methods The patients included were a subgroup of patients participating in the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Phase 2 study, which is an international multicenter study. The subgroup comprised 1938 patients, with an adnexal mass, recruited from 19 ultrasound centers in different countries. All patients were scanned using the same standardized ultrasound protocol. Information on more than 40 demographic and ultrasound variables were collected, but the evaluation of the OCS was optional. Only patients from centers that had evaluated the OCS in >= 90% of their cases were included. The gold standard was the histological diagnosis of the adnexal mass. The ability of the OCS to discriminate between borderline or invasively malignant vs. benign adnexal masses, as well as between invasively malignant vs. other (benign and borderline) tumors, was determined and compared with the performance of subjective evaluation of ultrasound findings by the ultrasound examiner. Results The OCS was evaluated in 1377 adnexal masses from 12 centers, 938 (68%) masses being benign, 86 (6%) borderline, 305 (22%) primary invasive and 48 (3%) metastases. The OCS was present in 398 (42%) of 938 benign masses, in 14 (16%) of 86 borderline tumors, in 18 (6%) of 305 primary invasive tumors (one malignant struma ovarii, one uterine clear cell adenocarcinoma and 16 epithelial carcinomas, i.e. four Stage I and 12 Stage II-IV) and in two (4%) of 48 ovarian metastases. Hence, the sensitivity and specificity for absent OCS to identify a malignancy was 92% and 42%, respectively, and the positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-, respectively) were 1.60 and 0.18. Subjective impression performed significantly better than the OCS. Sensitivity and specificity were 90% and 92%, respectively, LR+ was 11.0 and LR- was 0.10. For discrimination between invasive vs. benign or borderline tumors, the sensitivity for absent OCS was 94%, the specificity was 40%, the LR+ was 1.58 and the LR- was 0.14. Conclusion This study confirms previous reports that the presence of the OCS decreases the likelihood of invasive malignancy in adnexal masses. However it is a poor discriminator between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Copyright (C) 2010 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
|
|
