scholarly journals DIAGNOSTIC VALUE OF ULTRASOUND EXAMINATION IN PREOPERATIVE STAGING OF DISSEMINATED OVARIAN CANCER

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 26-32
Author(s):  
N. V. Vyatkina ◽  
I. G. Frolova ◽  
L. A. Kolomiets ◽  
S. V. Molchanov ◽  
A. B. Villert
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Ultrasound Examination ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Diagnostic Value

Diagnostic performance of ultrasound in assessing the extension of the disease in patients with suspicion of malignant ovarian tumor: correlation between ultrasound parameters and Fagotti’s score

2020 ◽  
pp. ijgc-2020-001606
Author(s):  
Maria Cristina Moruzzi ◽  
Giulia Bolomini ◽  
Francesca Moro ◽  
Floriana Mascilini ◽  
Silvia Ficarelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Ultrasound Examination ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Tumor Spread ◽  
Peritoneal Cancer ◽  
Preoperative Ultrasound ◽  
Ultrasound Evaluation ◽  
Abdominal Disease

BackgroundA radical surgical approach represents the mainstay treatment for gynecological malignancy, and preoperative staging of ovarian cancer is crucial. Ultrasound evaluation is widely recognized as the gold standard technique for the characterization of ovarian masses due to a high sensitivity for malignancy. In addition, its accuracy in defining intra-abdominal ovarian cancer spread has been previously proposed.Primary objectiveTo analyze the agreement between preoperative ultrasound examination and laparoscopic findings in assessing the extension of intra-abdominal disease using six parameters as described by Fagotti’s score.Study hypothesisWhen performed by expert examiners, ultrasound can be an accurate technique to assess tumor spread in ovarian cancer and therefore to predict surgical resectability.Trial designThis is a single-center prospective observational study. Patients with clinical and/or radiological suspicion of advanced ovarian or peritoneal cancer will be assessed with preoperative ultrasound and assigned a score based on the six Fagotti’s laparoscopic score parameters. Each parameter will then be correlated with laparoscopic findings.Major inclusion/exclusion criteriaEligible patients include women 18–75 years of age with clinical and/or imaging suggestive of advanced ovarian or peritoneal cancer, and an ECOG performance status 0–3.Primary endpointsSensitivity and specificity of ultrasound in detecting carcinomatosis, using the parameters of Fagotti’s score as a reference standard. Agreement between preoperative ultrasound examination and laparoscopic findings in assessing the extension of intra-abdominal disease as described in Fagotti’s score.Sample size240 patients.Estimate dates for completing accrual and presenting resultsThe accrual started in January 2019. Enrollment should be completed approximately by October 2020 and the results will be analyzed by December 2020.Trial registrationThe study received the Ethical Committee approval on July 19 2018 (Protocol 28967/18 ID:2172).

scholarly journals Diagnostic value of [18F]FDG PET/MRI for staging in patients with ovarian cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideaki Tsuyoshi ◽  
Tetsuya Tsujikawa ◽  
Shizuka Yamada ◽  
Hidehiko Okazawa ◽  
Yoshio Yoshida
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Fdg Pet ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Mri Contrast ◽  
Diagnostic Potential ◽  
Contrast Enhanced Ct ◽  
Contrast Enhanced ◽  
Imaging Results ◽  
N Stage ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic potential of PET/MRI with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose ([18F]FDG) in ovarian cancer. Materials and methods Participants comprised 103 patients with suspected ovarian cancer underwent pretreatment [18F]FDG PET/MRI, contrast-enhanced CT (ceCT) and pelvic dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (ceMRI). Diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and ceMRI for assessing the characterization and the extent of the primary tumor (T stage) and [18F]FDG PET/MRI and ceCT for assessing nodal (N stage) and distant (M stage) metastases was evaluated by two experienced readers. Histopathological and follow-up imaging results were used as the gold standard. The McNemar test was employed for statistical analysis. Results Accuracy for the characterization of suspected ovarian cancer was significantly better for [18F]FDG PET/MRI (92.5%) [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84–0.95] than for ceMRI (80.6%) (95% CI 0.72–0.83) (p < 0.05). Accuracy for T status was 96.4% (95% CI 0.96–0.96) and 92.9% (95% CI 0.93–0.93) for [18F]FDG PET/MRI and ceMRI/ceCT, respectively. Patient-based accuracies for N and M status were 100% (95% CI 0.88–1.00) and 100% (95% CI 0.88–1.00) for [18F]FDG PET/MRI and 85.2% (95% CI 0.76–0.85) and 30.8% (95% CI 0.19–0.31) for ceCT and M staging representing significant differences (p < 0.01). Lesion-based sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for N status were 78.6% (95% CI 0.57–0.91), 95.7% (95% CI 0.93–0.97) and 93.9% (95% CI 0.89–0.97) for [18F]FDG PET/MRI and 42.9% (95% CI 0.24–0.58), 96.6% (95% CI 0.94–0.98) and 90.8% (95% CI 0.87–0.94) for ceCT. Conclusions [18F]FDG PET/MRI offers better sensitivity and specificity for the characterization and M staging than ceMRI and ceCT, and diagnostic value for T and N staging equivalent to ceMRI and ceCT, suggesting that [18F]FDG PET/MRI might represent a useful diagnostic alternative to conventional imaging modalities in ovarian cancer.

211 Presentation of a Flims study: The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer–aprospective study

2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
S. Risum ◽  
C. Hogdall ◽  
A. Loft ◽  
A.K. Berthelsen ◽  
E. Hogdall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Primary Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Pet Ct

Is colonoscopy a suitable investigation in the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer patients?

2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Ravizza ◽  
G. Fiori ◽  
C. Trovato ◽  
P. Maisonneuve ◽  
L. Bocciolone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Preoperative Staging

scholarly journals Comparison of conventional, doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of ovarian masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. e052830
Author(s):  
Lizhang Xun ◽  
Lamei Zhai ◽  
Hui Xu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Doppler Us ◽  
Contrast Enhanced ◽  
Contrast Enhanced Ultrasonography ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
Ovarian Masses

ObjectivesTo assess the value of conventional, Doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) (conventional ultrasonography (US), Doppler US and CEUS) for diagnosing ovarian cancer.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were conducted for studies published until October 2021.Eligibility criteriaStudies assessed the diagnostic value of conventional US, Doppler US or CEUS for detecting ovarian cancer, with no restrictions placed on published language and status.Data extraction and synthesisThe study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent authors. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR), diagnostic OR (DOR) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were pooled using the bivariate generalised linear mixed model and random effects model.ResultsThe meta-analysis included 72 studies and involved 9296 women who presented with ovarian masses. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for conventional US were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87 to 0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82 to 0.91), 6.87 (95% CI: 4.98 to 9.49) and 0.10 (95% CI: 0.07 to 0.15), 57.52 (95% CI: 36.64 to 90.28) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93 to 0.97), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for Doppler US were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.95) and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.80 to 0.89), 6.10 (95% CI: 4.59 to 8.11) and 0.08 (95% CI: 0.06 to 0.11), 61.76 (95% CI: 39.99 to 95.37) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.97), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for CEUS were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.99) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.95), 11.47 (95% CI: 6.52 to 20.17) and 0.03 (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.09), 152.11 (95% CI: 77.77 to 297.51) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97 to 0.99), respectively. Moreover, the AUC values for conventional US (p=0.002) and Doppler US (p=0.005) were inferior to those of CEUS.ConclusionsConventional US, Doppler US and CEUS have a relatively high differential diagnostic value for differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian masses. The diagnostic performance of CEUS was superior to that of conventional US and Doppler US.

scholarly journals Optimization of Ultrasound Examination in Diagnosis of Knee Injuries

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-35
Author(s):  
I. A Pitsyn
Keyword(s):  
Ultrasound Examination ◽  
Knee Injuries ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Comparative Assessment ◽  
Knee Joints

Comparative assessment of arthroscopic and ultrasound examination data were performed in 393 patients (400 knee joints). For the perfection of diagnosis quality a principle of “feedback” (cooperation) between examiners was used. Basing on the analysis of the achieved results the reasons for sonographic and ultrasound results (objective and subjective) incompatibility were determined and real diagnostic value of ultrasound examination was estimated for every intraarticular knee structure separately.

scholarly journals Diagnostic value of tumor biomarkers CA125 and CA72-4 in differentiation of epithelial ovarian cancer and endometrioma

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jafari Shobeiri Mehri ◽  
Sepasi Farnaz ◽  
Dastranj Tabrizi Ali ◽  
Mostafa Gharabaghi Parvin ◽  
Ouladsahebmadarek Elaheh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Epithelial Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Tumor Biomarkers

scholarly journals Modern approaches in the treatment of patients with Paget-Schretter syndrome

2021 ◽  
pp. 68-72
Author(s):  
I. N. Sonkin ◽  
L. I. Syromyatnikova ◽  
E. Kh. Alieva ◽  
S. A. Mehryakov
Keyword(s):  
Ultrasound Examination ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Upper Extremities ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Arm Pain ◽  
Effort Thrombosis ◽  
Strenuous Physical Activity ◽  
Modern Vision ◽  
Venous Pattern ◽  
Active Patients

Goal. Consider the management of patients with effort thrombosis (Paget-Schretter syndrome).The article presents the modern vision of the problem of effort thrombosis. This review is aimed at describing the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of patients with Paget-Schretter syndrome. SPS occurs spontaneously, as a rule, in young, healthy and active patients aged 20-30 years after strenuous physical activity. The ratio of men and women is 2:1, recently there has been a growing trend among women. The main complaints of patients with SPS include swelling of the affected limb, discomfort when moving the affected arm, pain and heaviness when trying to raise the arm up. When examining these patients, attention is paid to hyperemia of the skin or their cyanotic nature, pasty limbs, as well as an enhanced venous pattern on the shoulder, the so-called Arshel sign. The diagnosis is based on the data of anamnesis, physical examination, the “gold standard of diagnostics” – ultrasound examination of veins, the sensitivity and specificity of which is 70-100%. The first step in the diagnosis can be the evaluation of the D-dimer, with its negative values, the SPSH is rejected. With an obvious clinic and controversial results of serial ultrasound examinations, other imaging methods are used, such as computed contrast tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, the diagnostic value of which is especially significant in occlusive venous thrombosis.SPS differs not only from DVT of the lower extremities, but also from secondary DVT of the upper extremities, which determines the peculiarities of management of this category of patients, including surgical treatment aimed at preventing subclavian vein compression in the future. The article summarizes the experience in the management of patients with blood thrombosis.

Ovarian cancer screening in the general population

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jérôme Mathis ◽  
Mohammed Amine Jellouli ◽  
Laura Sabiani ◽  
Joy Fest ◽  
Guillaume Blache ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
General Population ◽  
Ultrasound Examination ◽  
Screening Method ◽  
Diagnostic Technique ◽  
Ca 125 ◽  
Ovarian Cancer Screening ◽  
Cancer Antigen ◽  
Diagnostic Management

AbstractBackgroundOvarian carcinoma is a poor prognosis cancer mainly due to its late diagnosis. Its incidence is relatively low but mortality is high. The symptomatology is only slightly specific, which complicates diagnostic management. It would therefore be interesting to be able to establish a diagnosis as early as possible in order to improve the prognosis of patients suffering from ovarian cancer.Materials and methodsCurrently, the combination of an ultrasound examination with a cancer antigen (CA)-125 assay is the most effective diagnostic technique, but not already admitted as a screening method. Therefore, we realized an exhaustive analysis of the most important studies in the last 15 years, in order to find new approaches in ovarian cancer screening.ResultsThe age for initiating screening and its frequency are issues that are not fully resolved. The false positives and morbidity that result from screening are currently notable limitations.ConclusionsThe latest data do not support effective screening in the general population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document