Article Text
Abstract
Introduction/Background Considering the utility of Gynecologic Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS)in diagnosing malignant adnexal lesions such as ovarian cancer, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of this reporting system in differentiating between malignant and benign adnexal lesions.
Methodology In this cross sectional study, women with suspected adnexal lesions were enrolled. For differentiating of malignant adnexal lesions Grade II & III of GIRADs system were classified as low risk for malignancy and grades IV and V as high risk. Results of histopathologic diagnosis were compared with the results of the mentioned GI-RADS system classification and the diagnosed accuracy of the system was determined. Patients who did not have histopathologic diagnosis were followed up.
Results In this study, 197 women with suspected adnexal lesions were evaluated. Frequency of GI-RADS II, III, IV and V were 34.5% (69 cases), 38.0% (76 cases), 19.5% (39 cases) and 6.5% (13 cases) respectively. According to the low and high risk classification of GI-RADS, 72.5% were classified as GIRADs II & III and 26% as GIRADs IV & V respectively. Definitive histopathologic diagnosiswas reported for 158 cases. Histopathologic evaluation indicated that 12 (7.6%)of the masses were malignant and 146 (92.6%) were benign. Comparing with the histopathologicdiagnosis, theGI-RADS system sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, (+) LR and (−) LR were 91.6%, 80.82%, 28.2%, 99.1%, 4.77 and 0.10, respectively. The accuracy of the scoring system was 81.64%.
Conclusion GI-RADS system could be useful for clinicians for performing an appropriate clinical management. However, given that the sensitivity of the system is higher than its specificity, it is recommended to design further studies with additional laboratory tests such as CA-125.
Disclosure Nothing to disclose.