Variations in Ultrasound Reporting on Patients Referred for Investigation of Ovarian Masses

Le, Tien; Fayadh, Ridhab Al; Menard, Chantal; Hicks-Boucher, Wendy; Faught, Wylam; Hopkins, Laura; Fung-Kee-Fung, Michael

doi:10.1016/s1701-2163(16)32970-x

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Reporting in ultrasound evaluation of adnexal masses is an important issue. A recent study from Canada has shown that current reporting practices for ultrasound assessments in women with ovarian masses vary considerably and concluded that the use of a synoptic reporting system would be useful13. Inappropriate reporting may lead to unwarranted concern by the patient and referring clinician and could lead to unnecessary additional tests and surgery21.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Undoubtedly, this consensus has allowed a better, homogeneous description of adnexal masses. However, there is still significant variation in the reporting of ultrasound examination results for adnexal masses13. In fact, a recent consensus conference of the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound concluded that ‘investigation into structured reporting of adnexal cysts to allow for improved communication of results and recommendations for follow‐up’ is needed14.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

GI‐RADS reporting system for ultrasound evaluation of adnexal masses in clinical practice: a prospective multicenter study

Amor¹,

Alcázar

Vaccaro³

et al. 2011

Ultrasound in Obstet & Gyne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To assess the clinical usefulness of a structured reporting system based on ultrasound findings for management of adnexal masses.Methods This was a prospective multicenter study comprising 432 adnexal masses in 372 women (mean age, 44.0 (range, 13-78) (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and negative likelihood ratio (LR−) of GI-RADS classification for identifying adnexal masses at high risk of malignancy, considering GI-RADS 4 and 5 as being malignant.Results Of the 432 tumors, 112 were malignant and 320 benign. The GI-RADS classification rate was as follows: 92 (21%) cases; 184 (43%) cases; 40 (9%) cases;(27%)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GI‐RADS reporting system for ultrasound evaluation of adnexal masses in clinical practice: a prospective multicenter study

Amor¹,

Alcázar

Vaccaro³

et al. 2011

Ultrasound in Obstet & Gyne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2009, Amor et al proposed a unified and structured language for an ultrasonographic report of adnexal masses similar to that used for a breast ultrasound (BI-RADS) called Gynecology Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS) [16]. This system is based on pattern recognition analysis [8] and prior risk estimation of the probability of malignancy, based on previous studies [17]. GI-RADS was developed to facilitate communication between radiologists and referring clinicians aiming to reduce the confusion and to help predict the probability of malignancy, thereby improving and individualizing treatment options.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The diagnostic efficacy of Gynecology Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS): single-center prospective cross-sectional study

Khalaf

Desoky

Seifeldein

et al. 2019

Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To assess the validity and accuracy of GI-RADS classification in the prediction of malignancy and in triaging the management protocol in ovarian lesions.Results: One hundred fifty-six ovarian lesions were detected in the examined 116 women. The prevalence of malignant tumors was 44%. Overall GI-RADS classification rates were as follows: 41 cases (26.3%) were classified as GI-RADS 1, 26 cases (16 .7%) as GI-RADS 2, 34 cases (21.8%) as GI-RADS 3, 14 cases (8.9%) as GI-RADS 4, and 41 cases (26.3%) as GI-RADS 5. No follow-up was done in GI-RADS 1 patients. A final diagnosis of all GI-RADS 2 ovarian masses such as functional cyst (n = 10), hemorrhagic cysts (n = 8), corpus luteal cysts (n = 6), and some GI-RADS 3 as simple cysts (n = 10) was made by spontaneous resolution of these masses at follow-up after 6 weeks. Fifteen cases of GI-RADS 3 as mature teratoma, serous and mucinous cystadenoma, endometrioma, and ovarian torsion and all GI-RADS 4 and 5 underwent laparoscopic or surgical removal of the ovarian mass with histopathological examination. The diagnostic performance of the GI-RADS in predicting the risk of malignancy in ovarian masses was as follows: 98.11% sensitivity, 95.15% specificity, 91.2% positive predictive value (PPV), 99.2% negative predictive value (NPV), and 20.2 positive likelihood ratio, and the overall accuracy was 96.2% (area under receiver operating curve (AUC) = 0.96, P < 0.001).Conclusion: GI-RADS classification performs well as a reporting system of the ovarian masses with high diagnostic performance in the prediction of malignancy, and it seems to be a helpful tool in triaging management in patients with ovarian masses.

show abstract

“…The ability of ultrasonography to establish whether an adnexal mass is malignant can vary, with an accurate diagnosis dependent on both technical skill and experience . The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis consensus nomenclature and definitions for all tumor features evaluated by ultrasonography has improved discrimination of adnexal masses by including quantitative assessment of morphological features .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic performance of the Gynecology Imaging Reporting and Data System for malignant adnexal masses

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2017

Intl J Gynecology & Obste

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Variations in Ultrasound Reporting on Patients Referred for Investigation of Ovarian Masses

Cited by 15 publications

References 33 publications

GI‐RADS reporting system for ultrasound evaluation of adnexal masses in clinical practice: a prospective multicenter study

GI‐RADS reporting system for ultrasound evaluation of adnexal masses in clinical practice: a prospective multicenter study

The diagnostic efficacy of Gynecology Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS): single-center prospective cross-sectional study

Diagnostic performance of the Gynecology Imaging Reporting and Data System for malignant adnexal masses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About