Literature DB >> 8055463

Diagnostic value of pelvic examination, ultrasound, and serum CA 125 in postmenopausal women with a pelvic mass. An international multicenter study.

E M Schutter1, P Kenemans, C Sohn, P Kristen, G Crombach, R Westermann, V Môbus, M Kaufmann, H Caffier, P Schmidt-Rhode.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In a prospective study, the differential diagnostic potential of pelvic examination, ultrasound, and serum CA 125 assay in postmenopausal patients presenting with a pelvic mass was assessed.
METHODS: A total of 228 patients were evaluated preoperatively in an international, multicenter, prospective study using a standard protocol for pelvic examination, transvaginal (occasionally additional abdominal) ultrasound, and serum CA 125 determination with a cut-off level of 35 U/ml.
RESULTS: Ninety-five malignant (41.7%) and 127 benign (55.7%) pelvic tumors were found in addition to 6 borderline ovarian tumors (2.6%) in the 228 patients. Seventy-two patients had ovarian carcinoma, 49 of whom were International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage III or IV. Borderline tumors were excluded from the statistical calculations. The individual accuracy of pelvic examination, ultrasound, and serum CA 125 in discriminating between benign and malignant pelvic masses was approximately the same (76, 74, and 77%, respectively). Using logistic regression analysis, the power of pelvic examination appeared to be the most relevant factor (adjusted odds ratio, 9.2), followed by serum CA 125 (odds ratio, 5.6), and ultrasound (odds ratio, 4.9). Age appeared to be nonpredictive. No cancer was found in any patient in whom all three methods scored negative (n = 53; positive predictive value for malignancy = 0 and 95%; confidence interval, 0-7).
CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of pelvic examination, ultrasound, and serum CA 125 leads to improved discrimination between malignant and benign pelvic masses, because malignancy can be excluded when all three examination methods are negative. A change to a more patient-tailored surgical approach could be considered in those cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8055463     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19940815)74:4<1398::aid-cncr2820740433>3.0.co;2-j

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  9 in total

Review 1.  Management of gynaecological cancers.

Authors:  A Melville; A Eastwood; J Kleijnen; H Kitchener; P Martin-Hirsch; L Nelson
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1999-12

2.  [Clinical utility of serous tumoural markers].

Authors:  A Martín Suárez; L Alonso Díaz; I Ordiz Alvarez; J Vázquez; F Vizoso Piñeiro
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 1.137

3.  Management of a suspicious adnexal mass: a clinical practice guideline.

Authors:  J E Dodge; A L Covens; C Lacchetti; L M Elit; T Le; M Devries-Aboud; M Fung-Kee-Fung
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.677

4.  Current diagnostic approach to patients with adnexal masses: which tools are relevant in routine praxis?

Authors:  Milan M Terzic; Jelena Dotlic; Ivana Likic; Nebojsa Ladjevic; Natasa Brndusic; Nebojsa Arsenovic; Sanja Maricic; Tihomir Mihailovic; Sasa Andrijasevic
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 5.087

5.  Assessing the risk of ovarian malignancy in asymptomatic women with abnormal CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasound scans in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian screening trial.

Authors:  Edward E Partridge; Robert T Greenlee; Thomas L Riley; John Commins; Lawrence Ragard; Jian-Lun Xu; Saundra S Buys; Philip C Prorok; Mona N Fouad
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 6.  Surgery for elderly patients with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Martin G A Bäuerle; Rolf Kreienberg; Tanja Volm
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.075

7.  Preoperative assessment of ovarian tumors using a modified multivariate index assay.

Authors:  Hero A Abdurrahman; Ariana Kh Jawad; Shahla K Alalalf
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 4.234

Review 8.  Added Value of Assessing Adnexal Masses with Advanced MRI Techniques.

Authors:  I Thomassin-Naggara; D Balvay; A Rockall; M F Carette; M Ballester; E Darai; M Bazot
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Diagnostic Value of the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) for Detection of Pelvic Malignancies Compared with Pathology.

Authors:  Mojgan Karimi-Zarchi; Shokouh Paymani Mojaver; Mitra Rouhi; Seyed Hossein Hekmatimoghaddam; Reza Nafisi Moghaddam; Pouria Yazdian-Anari; Soraya Teimoori
Journal:  Electron Physician       Date:  2015-11-20
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.