Adnexal masses | ScienceGate

Pelvic masses can pose a diagnostic dilemma with a broad differential to include both gynecological and non-gynecologic etiologies. While the initial instinct may be to search for gynecologic causes for the female patient, non-gynecologic etiologies must be considered as well. The presentation can be similar amongst many different causes of pelvic masses and imaging is generally required for further assessment to determine if the mass is intra- or extraperitoneal. The etiology of adnexal masses covers several subspecialties: gynecology, urology, gastroenterology, neurology, and oncology. For this reason, it is important for all to be aware of the differential diagnosis for pelvic masses.

Download Full-text

Non-contrast MRI can accurately characterize adnexal masses: a retrospective study

European Radiology ◽

10.1007/s00330-021-07737-9 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Hilal Sahin ◽

Camilla Panico ◽

Stephan Ursprung ◽

Vittorio Simeon ◽

Paolo Chiodini ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Contrast Medium ◽

High Accuracy ◽

Receiver Operating Curve ◽

Intravenous Contrast ◽

Random Subset ◽

Adnexal Masses ◽

Intravenous Contrast Medium ◽

Mri Protocol ◽

Malignant Lesions ◽

Mri Score

Abstract Objective To determine the accuracy of interpretation of a non-contrast MRI protocol in characterizing adnexal masses. Methods and materials Two hundred ninety-one patients (350 adnexal masses) who underwent gynecological MRI at our institution between the 1st of January 2008 and the 31st of December 2018 were reviewed. A random subset (102 patients with 121 masses) was chosen to evaluate the reproducibility and repeatability of readers’ assessments. Readers evaluated non-contrast MRI scans retrospectively, assigned a 5-point score for the risk of malignancy and gave a specific diagnosis. The reference standard for the diagnosis was histopathology or at least one-year imaging follow-up. Diagnostic accuracy of the non-contrast MRI score was calculated. Inter- and intra-reader agreement was analyzed with Cohen’s kappa statistics. Results There were 53/350 (15.1%) malignant lesions in the whole cohort and 20/121 (16.5%) malignant lesions in the random subset. Good agreement between readers was found for the non-contrast MRI score (к = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58–0.86) whilst the intra-reader agreement was excellent (к = 0.81, 95% CI 0.70–0.88). The non-contrast MRI score value of ≥ 4 was associated with malignancy with a sensitivity of 84.9%, a specificity of 95.9%, an accuracy of 94.2% and a positive likelihood ratio of 21 (area under the receiver operating curve 0.93, 95% CI 0.90–0.96). Conclusion Adnexal mass characterization on MRI without the administration of contrast medium has a high accuracy and excellent inter- and intra-reader agreement. Our results suggest that non-contrast studies may offer a reasonable diagnostic alternative when the administration of intravenous contrast medium is not possible. Key Points • A non-contrast pelvic MRI protocol may allow the characterization of adnexal masses with high accuracy. • The non-contrast MRI score may be used in clinical practice for differentiating benign from malignant adnexal lesions when the lack of intravenous contrast medium precludes analysis with the O–RADS MRI score.

Download Full-text

Role of human epididymis protein 4 for detection of ovarian carcinoma in adnexal masses: A pilot study

10.1055/s-0039-1685305 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Nidhi Bansal ◽

A. Suneja ◽

K. Guleria ◽

N. B. Vaid ◽

K. Mishra ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Ca 125 ◽

Serum Samples ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Adnexal Masses ◽

Good Discriminator ◽

Risk Of Malignancy ◽

Risk Of Malignancy Index ◽

Benign Tumours

Introduction: HE4 is a novel tumour biomarker used for early diagnosis of ovarian cancer. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of HE4 alone and in combination with CA125, risk of malignancy index (RMI), risk of malignancy algorithm (ROMA). Methods: It was a cross sectional study conducted recruiting 88 women with adnexal masses who were planned for surgery. After baseline work up and ultrasound examination, serum samples were collected for estimation of CA 125 and HE4 levels. Serum HE4 levels were estimated using ELISA kit. RMI and ROMA score were calculated and diagnostic accuracy of HE4, CA 125, RMI, ROMA and their combination were compared. Cut off for HE4 and ROMA score were calculated using ROC curve. Results: Of 88 subjects, 66 were analyzed with 19 malignant (including 5 LMP) and 47 benign cases. The median value of HE4 among malignant cases was found to be significantly higher than among the benign cases. PPV and NPV of HE4 at a cut off 130.8 pMol/ml was 85.7% and 77.9% respectively. Highest PPV (88.9%) with acceptable NPV (80.7%) was found with ROMA followed by HE4 (PPV 85.7%; NPV 77.97%), RMI (PPV 76.92%; NPV 83%) and CA125 (PPV 52%; NPV 80.85%). Conclusion: HE4 levels were lower in Indian population both in malignant and benign tumours as compared to other studies. HE4 is a good discriminator and gives best accuracy when it is combined with CA125 in a logistic algorithm, ROMA.

Download Full-text