| Literature DB >> 32724409 |
Guannan He1, Jing Zhao1, Zhirong Yang2, Zhigang Zhao3, Yan Bai1, Wen Xiong4.
Abstract
Clinical value of color Doppler ultrasound and two-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors (OSCSTs) were explored. A total of 91 patients with positive OSCSTs admitted to Sichuan Provincial Hospital for Women and Children from May 2014 to June 2018 were selected as research objects. There were 48 patients diagnosed by color Doppler ultrasound technology as the color Doppler group and 43 patients diagnosed by two-dimensional ultrasound technology as the two-dimensional ultrasound group. Results of ultrasound images in the two groups were compared, and the diagnostic value of two ultrasound techniques combined with detection of CA125 and CA199 for OSCSTs was compared. The real internal echo of color Doppler ultrasound was significantly higher than that of two-dimensional ultrasound (P<0.05). The blood flow signal of color Doppler ultrasound was significantly higher than that of two-dimensional ultrasound (P<0.05). The diagnostic sensitivity and diagnostic coincidence rate of color Doppler ultrasound for lymph node metastasis of OSCSTs were significantly higher than those of two-dimensional ultrasound (P<0.05). Color Doppler ultrasound combined with CA125 and CA199 detection has higher accuracy than two-dimensional ultrasound combination. In conclusion, both color Doppler ultrasound and two-dimensional ultrasound are used to observe OSCSTs for early diagnosis, but the sensitivity and diagnostic coincidence rate of color Doppler ultrasound for clinical diagnosis of OSCSTs are higher than those of two-dimensional ultrasound, so color Doppler ultrasound has higher diagnostic value in OSCSTs. Copyright: © He et al.Entities:
Keywords: color Doppler ultrasound; diagnostic value; image features; ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors; two-dimensional ultrasound
Year: 2020 PMID: 32724409 PMCID: PMC7377105 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2020.11704
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
General data of patients.
| Factors | Color Doppler ultrasound group n=48 | Two-dimensional ultrasound group n=43 | t/χ2 value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 0.002 | 0.967 | ||
| ≤41 | 27 (56.25) | 24 (55.81) | ||
| >41 | 21 (43.75) | 19 (44.19) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.008 | 0.930 | ||
| ≤21 | 23 (47.92) | 21 (48.84) | ||
| <21 | 25 (52.08) | 22 (51.16) | ||
| Irregular vaginal bleeding | 0.402 | 0.526 | ||
| Yes | 21 (43.75) | 16 (37.21) | ||
| No | 27 (56.25) | 27 (62.79) | ||
| Abdominal pain | 2.227 | 0.996 | ||
| Yes | 29 (60.42) | 26 (60.47) | ||
| No | 19 (39.58) | 17 (39.53) | ||
| Ascites | 0.096 | 0.757 | ||
| Yes | 9 (18.75) | 7 (16.28) | ||
| No | 39 (81.25) | 36 (83.72) | ||
| Typing | 0.488 | 0.993 | ||
| Granulosa cell tumors | 15 (31.25) | 14 (32.56) | ||
| Thecoma | 2 (4.17) | 3 (6.98) | ||
| Mixed tumors | 11 (22.92) | 9 (20.93) | ||
| Supportive stromal cell tumors | 7 (14.58) | 6 (13.95) | ||
| Sclerosing stromal tumors | 9 (18.75) | 7 (16.28) | ||
| Fibrosarcoma | 4 (8.33) | 4 (9.30) | ||
| C125 (U/ml) | 95.62±14.52 | 98.63±15.45 | 0.958 | 0.341 |
| C199 (U/ml) | 97.46±15.73 | 98.72±15.82 | 0.381 | 0.705 |
| AFP (µg/l) | 75.63±9.62 | 76.36±9.93 | 0.356 | 0.723 |
Comparison of size, form, boundary and location of tumors under color Doppler ultrasound and two-dimensional ultrasound.
| Features of tumors | Color Doppler ultrasound group n=48 | Two-dimensional ultrasound group n=43 | t/χ2 value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tumor size | 7.34±4.53 | 7.51±4.46 | 0.180 | 0.858 |
| Form | 0.112 | 0.738 | ||
| Irregular | 3 (6.25) | 2 (4.65) | ||
| Regular | 45 (93.75) | 41 (95.35) | ||
| Boundary | 0.267 | 0.605 | ||
| Clear | 43 (89.58) | 37 (86.05) | ||
| Not clear | 5 (10.42) | 6 (13.95) | ||
| Location | 0.024 | 0.876 | ||
| Unilateral | 32 (66.67) | 28 (65.12) | ||
| Multilaterality | 16 (33.33) | 15 (34.88) |
Comparison of results of two kinds of ultrasound images in patients with positive ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors.
| Features of imaging | Color Doppler ultrasound group n=48 | Two-dimensional ultrasound group n=43 | t/χ2 value | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Internal echo | 4.135 | 0.042 | ||
| Solid type | 31 (64.58) | 19 (44.19) | ||
| Cystic-solid type | 17 (35.42) | 24 (55.81) | ||
| Posterior echo | 1.128 | 0.569 | ||
| Uniformity | 10 (20.83) | 7 (16.28) | ||
| Weak | 27 (56.25) | 22 (51.16) | ||
| Enhanced | 11 (22.92) | 14 (32.56) | ||
| Blood flow signal | 5.093 | 0.024 | ||
| Obvious | 33 (68.75) | 38 (88.37) | ||
| Not obvious | 15 (31.25) | 5 (11.63) | ||
| Calcified lesions | 1.129 | 0.288 | ||
| Yes | 16 (33.33) | 19 (44.19) | ||
| No | 32 (66.67) | 24 (55.81) |
Figure 1.Color Doppler ultrasound image of patients with positive ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors.
Figure 2.Color Doppler ultrasound image of patients with positive ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors.
Diagnostic results of color Doppler ultrasound and two-dimensional ultrasound combined with CA125 and CA199 detection for ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors.
| Diagnostic results | Pathology (metastasis) | Pathology (non-metastasis) | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Color Doppler ultrasound | |||
| Diagnosis (metastasis) | 36 | 3 | 39 |
| Diagnosis (non-metastasis) | 2 | 7 | 9 |
| Total | 38 | 10 | 48 |
| Two-dimensional ultrasound | |||
| Diagnosis (metastasis) | 24 | 9 | 33 |
| Diagnosis (non-metastasis) | 4 | 6 | 10 |
| Total | 28 | 15 | 43 |
| Color Doppler ultrasound combined with CA125 and CA199 detection | |||
| Diagnosis (metastasis) | 36 | 2 | 38 |
| Diagnosis (non-metastasis) | 2 | 8 | 10 |
| Total | 38 | 10 | 48 |
| Two-dimensional ultrasound combined with CA125 and CA199 detection | |||
| Diagnosis (metastasis) | 24 | 6 | 30 |
| Diagnosis (non-metastasis) | 4 | 9 | 13 |
| Total | 28 | 15 | 43 |
Diagnostic efficacy analysis of individual indicators and joint detection for ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors.
| Diagnostic value | Color Doppler ultrasound | Two-dimensional ultrasound | Color Doppler ultrasound + CA125 + CA199 | Two-dimensional ultrasound + CA125 + CA199 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | 92.31% (36/39) | 65.12% (24/33)[ | 94.74% (36/38) | 80.00% (24/30)[ |
| Specificity | 77.78% (7/9) | 60.00% (6/10) | 80.00% (8/10) | 69.23% (9/13)[ |
| Diagnostic coincidence rate | 89.58% (43/48) | 69.77% (30/43)[ | 91.67% (44/48) | 76.74% (33/43)[ |
P<0.05 compared with color Doppler ultrasound
P<0.05 compared with color Doppler ultrasound + CA125 + CA199.