Article Text
Abstract
Objective: Assessment of adnexal masses focuses on the accurate discrimination between benign and malignant lesions. In our tertiary referral center, we evaluated the discriminative power of expert sonography, serum CA-125 measurement, risk malignancy index (RMI) by Jacobs, and 2 preoperative triage strategies (combination of CA-125 measurement and RMI assessment with expert sonography).
Methods: From 2002 to 2008, a total of 1362 surgical explorations with indication of an adnexal mass from our department were included in this study. Preoperative workup in all patients comprised a gynecologic examination, expert sonography, and serum CA-125 measurement. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), and Cohen κ (prevalence-adjusted measurement) to evaluate the discriminative power of each diagnostic test.
Results: Discriminative power of the evaluated tests differed depending on patients' menopausal state. In the premenopause, expert sonography reached the highest discriminative power with a κ value of 0.53, a PPV of 0.45, and an NPV of 0.99. In the postmemopause, the combinations of expert sonography with CA-125 serum measurement or RMI assessment achieved the highest discriminative power: The combination of CA-125 and expert sonography reached a PPV of 0.89 and an NPV of 0.97; κ yielded 0.84. The RMI combined with expert sonography as a triage strategy showed comparable results with a PPV of 0.89, an NPV of 0.96, and a κ value of 0.82.
Conclusions: Preoperative assessment of an adnexal mass may be guided by the patient's menopausal state. In premenopausal patients, expert sonography is helpful for preoperative differentiation between benign and malignant lesions; in postmenopausal patients, the use of triage strategies of either CA-125 serum measurement or RMI combined with expert sonography can be recommended.
- Adnexal lesions
- Preoperative differentiation
- Expert sonography
- CA-125
- RMI
- Triage strategies
- Menopausal state
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Dr Radosa was funded by a stipend from the Interdisciplinary Center of Clinical Research, University of Jena.
The authors declare that there is no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.