Literature DB >> 33966893

Validation of American College of Radiology Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Ultrasound (O-RADS US): Analysis on 1054 adnexal masses.

Lan Cao1, Mingjie Wei1, Ying Liu1, Juan Fu1, Honghuan Zhang2, Jing Huang2, Xiaoqing Pei3, Jianhua Zhou4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic performance and inter-observer agreement of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Ultrasound (O-RADS US).
METHODS: From January 2016 to December 2018 a total of 1054 adnexal lesions in 1035 patients with pathologic results from two hospitals were retrospectively included. Each lesion was assigned to an O-RADS US category according to the criteria. Kappa (κ) statistics were applied to assess inter-observer agreement between a less experienced and an expert radiologist.
RESULTS: Of the 1054 adnexal lesions, 750 were benign and 304 were malignant. The malignancy rates of O-RADS 5, O-RADS 4, O-RADS 3, and O-RADS 2 lesions were 89.57%, 34.46%, 1.10%, and 0.45% respectively. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.960 (95% CI, 0.947-0.971). The optimal cutoff value for predicting malignancy was >O-RADS 3 with a sensitivity and specificity of 98.7% (95% CI, 0.964-0.996) and 83.2% (95% CI, 0.802-0.858) respectively. When sub-classifying multilocular cysts and smooth solid lesions in O-RADS 4 lesions as O-RADS 4a lesions and the rest cystic lesions with solid components as O-RADS 4b lesions, the malignancy rate were 17.02% and 42.57% respectively, which showed better risk stratification (P < 0.001). The inter-observer agreement between a less-experienced and an expert radiologist of O-RADS categorization was good (κ = 0.714).
CONCLUSIONS: The ACR O-RADS US provides effective malignancy risk stratification for adnexal lesions with high reliability for radiologists with different experience. Sub-grouping of O-RADS 4 lesions into two groups facilitated better stratification of the intermediate risk.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adnexal masses; Malignancy risk; O-RADS; Ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33966893     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.04.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  10 in total

1.  Interreader Agreement and Intermodality Concordance of O-RADS US and MRI for Assessing Large, Complex Ovarian-Adnexal Cysts.

Authors:  Yang Guo; Catherine H Phillips; Krista Suarez-Weiss; Lauren A Roller; Mary C Frates; Carol B Benson; Atul B Shinagare
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2022-09

2.  O-RADS: Good Enough for Everyday Practice or a Work in Progress?

Authors:  Deborah A Baumgarten
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2022-09

Review 3.  Ovarian Adnexal Reporting Data System (O-RADS) for Classifying Adnexal Masses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Julio Vara; Nabil Manzour; Enrique Chacón; Ana López-Picazo; Marta Linares; Maria Ángela Pascual; Stefano Guerriero; Juan Luis Alcázar
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-27       Impact factor: 6.575

4.  Management of the Adnexal Mass: Considerations for the Family Medicine Physician.

Authors:  Brian Bullock; Lisa Larkin; Lauren Turker; Kate Stampler
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-07-05

5.  Diagnostic Performance of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) Ultrasound Risk Score in Women in the United States.

Authors:  Priyanka Jha; Akshya Gupta; Timothy M Baran; Katherine E Maturen; Krupa Patel-Lippmann; Hanna M Zafar; Aya Kamaya; Neha Antil; Lisa Barroilhet; Elizabeth A Sadowski
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-06-01

6.  Ultrasonographic ovarian mass scoring system for predicting malignancy in pregnant women with ovarian mass.

Authors:  Se Jin Lee; Hye Rim Oh; Sunghun Na; Han Sung Hwang; Seung Mi Lee
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Sci       Date:  2021-12-14

7.  A comparison of the diagnostic performance of the O-RADS, RMI4, IOTA LR2, and IOTA SR systems by senior and junior doctors.

Authors:  Yuyang Guo; Baihua Zhao; Shan Zhou; Lieming Wen; Jieyu Liu; Yaqian Fu; Fang Xu; Minghui Liu
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2022-01-31

8.  Interobserver agreement between eight observers using IOTA simple rules and O-RADS lexicon descriptors for adnexal masses.

Authors:  Neha Antil; Preethi R Raghu; Luyao Shen; Thodsawit Tiyarattanachai; Edwina M Chang; Craig W K Ferguson; Amanzo A Ho; Amelie M Lutz; Aladin J Mariano; L Nayeli Morimoto; Aya Kamaya
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-06-28

9.  Reliability of ultrasound ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system amongst less experienced readers before and after training.

Authors:  Prayash Katlariwala; Mitchell P Wilson; Yeli Pi; Baljot S Chahal; Roger Croutze; Deelan Patel; Vimal Patel; Gavin Low
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2022-09-28

10.  Efficacy of IOTA simple rules, O-RADS, and CA125 to distinguish benign and malignant adnexal masses.

Authors:  Wen Ting Xie; Yao Qin Wang; Zhi Sheng Xiang; Zhong Shi Du; Shi Xin Huang; Yi Jie Chen; Li Na Tang
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2022-01-23       Impact factor: 4.234

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.