AIM: The objectives were to attempt to differentiate between benignancy and malignancy by focusing not on macroscopic finding of tumor sections, but on the solid areas by diagnostic imaging. To investigate the usefulness of diagnostic imaging for ovarian tumors, we examined the solid areas in the tumor and their shape and analyzed the relationship between these factors and the malignant potential. METHODS: Subjects were 921 surgical cases (1074 tumors) over a period of 7 years. Diagnostic images (ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) were reread, focusing on the solid area. Tumors were classified into four groups according to the prominence of the solid area, and the findings were compared with the postoperative diagnosis. RESULTS: Of the cases, 718 indicated benign, borderline malignancy in 29 and malignancy in 174. The malignant potential of tumors with solid areas was significantly higher than those with no solid area. However, upon comparison among the different groups with solid areas, no significant differences were detected in terms of the frequency at which malignancies were detected, despite the differences between the groups with respect to size and shape. CONCLUSION: It is important for the treatment strategy that solid areas, even if small, should not be neglected, and that malignancies are found at high frequency regardless of shape, size and prominence.
AIM: The objectives were to attempt to differentiate between benignancy and malignancy by focusing not on macroscopic finding of tumor sections, but on the solid areas by diagnostic imaging. To investigate the usefulness of diagnostic imaging for ovarian tumors, we examined the solid areas in the tumor and their shape and analyzed the relationship between these factors and the malignant potential. METHODS: Subjects were 921 surgical cases (1074 tumors) over a period of 7 years. Diagnostic images (ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) were reread, focusing on the solid area. Tumors were classified into four groups according to the prominence of the solid area, and the findings were compared with the postoperative diagnosis. RESULTS: Of the cases, 718 indicated benign, borderline malignancy in 29 and malignancy in 174. The malignant potential of tumors with solid areas was significantly higher than those with no solid area. However, upon comparison among the different groups with solid areas, no significant differences were detected in terms of the frequency at which malignancies were detected, despite the differences between the groups with respect to size and shape. CONCLUSION: It is important for the treatment strategy that solid areas, even if small, should not be neglected, and that malignancies are found at high frequency regardless of shape, size and prominence.