Article informationBackground: Adnexal masses are common presentation among gynecological practice. Differentiation of benign than malignant lesions is of utmost importance for treatment plan. The gold standard other than histopathology did not determined yet. The aim of the work: The current work aimed to measure the predictive power of the preoperative risk of malignancy index [RMI] to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Patients and Methods: This study included 80 patients, presented with adnexal masses/ovarian cysts. They were managed by surgery, during the period from May 2015 to November 2017. We collected the following data: age, gravidity, menopause status, parity, cancer antigen 125 [CA125] levels and ultrasound results. RMI was calculated according to Tingulstad" model. Postoperatively, histopathology results were documented for every patient and used as the gold standard diagnostic modality to measure predictive power of RMI and CA125. Results: Malignant lesions were documented in 27.5%, while 72.5% were benign. The benign tumors were significantly associated with younger age than malignant lesions [27.88±7.68 versus 41.05±11.81]. The postmenopausal women percentages were significantly higher among malignant than benign ovarian lesions [45.5% vs. 1.7%, respectively, p < 0.001]. All ultrasound parameters of RMI were significantly different in malignant than benign masses. The optimal cutoff points of RMI and CA125 were 90.6 and 20.0 respectively. At such points, RMI had 90.6 sensitivity. However, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive values were 68.2%, 75.9%, 51.7% and 86.3%, respectively. Conclusion: RMI represented a significant indicator in preoperative assessment of adnexal mass, and was valuable to refer patients to oncology centers, and recommended for screening purposes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.