PURPOSE: To evaluate the available information on the preoperative diagnosis of borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs). METHODS: Articles were identified through electronic databases (Medline and EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed), no date or language restrictions were placed; relevant citations were hand searched. RESULTS: Women with BOTs are more likely to have no symptom than women with invasive ovarian cancers; however, the type of symptoms is similar in patients with BOTs and invasive ovarian cancers. Up to 61% of women with BOTs have elevated CA-125; CA 19.9 and endoglin are not useful for diagnosing BOTs. Further studies are required to determine whether the measurements of calprotectin, oviductal glycoprotein 1 and growth differentiation factor-15 are useful for diagnosing BOTs. Ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the mainstay for the diagnosis of BOTs. Combining MRI and positron emission tomography may facilitate the identification of BOTs. CONCLUSION: After completion of this article, the reader should be aware of the symptoms of BOTs, the potential role and pitfalls of tumor marker measurement. In addition, the reader will understand the appearance of BOTs at imaging techniques; the reader will be able to compare and combine ultrasonography, MRI and positron emission tomography in diagnosing BOTs. In clinical practice, the reader should be better able to assess whether an ovarian mass is a benign tumor, a BOT or an invasive cancer.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the available information on the preoperative diagnosis of borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs). METHODS: Articles were identified through electronic databases (Medline and EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed), no date or language restrictions were placed; relevant citations were hand searched. RESULTS:Women with BOTs are more likely to have no symptom than women with invasive ovarian cancers; however, the type of symptoms is similar in patients with BOTs and invasive ovarian cancers. Up to 61% of women with BOTs have elevated CA-125; CA 19.9 and endoglin are not useful for diagnosing BOTs. Further studies are required to determine whether the measurements of calprotectin, oviductal glycoprotein 1 and growth differentiation factor-15 are useful for diagnosing BOTs. Ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the mainstay for the diagnosis of BOTs. Combining MRI and positron emission tomography may facilitate the identification of BOTs. CONCLUSION: After completion of this article, the reader should be aware of the symptoms of BOTs, the potential role and pitfalls of tumor marker measurement. In addition, the reader will understand the appearance of BOTs at imaging techniques; the reader will be able to compare and combine ultrasonography, MRI and positron emission tomography in diagnosing BOTs. In clinical practice, the reader should be better able to assess whether an ovarian mass is a benign tumor, a BOT or an invasive cancer.
Authors: Jun-Hyeok Kang; Joseph J Noh; Soo Young Jeong; Jung In Shim; Yoo-Young Lee; Chel Hun Choi; Jeong-Won Lee; Byoung-Gie Kim; Duk-Soo Bae; Hyun-Soo Kim; Tae-Joong Kim Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Shu Hui Zhao; Jin Wei Qiang; Guo Fu Zhang; Feng Hua Ma; Song Qi Cai; Hai Ming Li; Li Wang Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-05-29 Impact factor: 5.315