Diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer: comparative values of Doppler and conventional US, CT, and MR imaging correlated with surgery and histopathologic analysis--report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group
- PMID: 10405715
- DOI: 10.1148/radiology.212.1.r99jl3619
Diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer: comparative values of Doppler and conventional US, CT, and MR imaging correlated with surgery and histopathologic analysis--report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the optimal imaging modality for diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer.
Materials and methods: Two hundred eighty women suspected to have ovarian cancer were enrolled in a prospective study before surgery. Doppler ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging were used to evaluate the mass; conventional US, CT, and MR imaging were used to stage spread.
Results: All three modalities had high accuracy (0.91) for the overall diagnosis of malignancy. In the ovaries, the accuracy of MR imaging (0.91) was higher than that of CT and significantly higher than that of Doppler US (0.78). In the extraovarian pelvis and in the abdomen, conventional US, CT, and MR imaging had similar accuracies (0.87-0.95). In differentiation of disease confined to the pelvis from abdominal spread, the specificity of conventional US (96%) was higher than that of CT and significantly higher than that of MR imaging (88%), whereas the sensitivities of MR imaging (98%) and CT (92%) were significantly higher than that of conventional US (75%).
Conclusion: MR imaging is superior to Doppler US and CT in diagnosis of malignant ovarian masses. There is little variation among conventional US, CT, and MR imaging as regards staging.
Similar articles
-
Primary versus secondary ovarian malignancy: imaging findings of adnexal masses in the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group Study.Radiology. 2001 Apr;219(1):213-8. doi: 10.1148/radiology.219.1.r01ap28213. Radiology. 2001. PMID: 11274559
-
Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities--report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group.Radiology. 2000 Jun;215(3):761-7. doi: 10.1148/radiology.215.3.r00jn25761. Radiology. 2000. PMID: 10831697
-
Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI.Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Mar;116(3):389-94. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.10.059. Epub 2009 Nov 18. Gynecol Oncol. 2010. PMID: 19926121 Clinical Trial.
-
[Computerized tomography and MR tomography in diagnosis of ovarian tumors].Radiologe. 1994 Jul;34(7):362-9. Radiologe. 1994. PMID: 7938483 Review. German.
-
Ovarian cancer: the clinical role of US, CT, and MRI.Eur Radiol. 2003 Dec;13 Suppl 4:L87-104. doi: 10.1007/s00330-003-1964-y. Eur Radiol. 2003. PMID: 15018172 Review.
Cited by
-
Role of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in patients with ovarian masses.Int J Womens Health. 2011 Apr 5;3:123-6. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S15501. Int J Womens Health. 2011. PMID: 21573148 Free PMC article.
-
Indeterminate adnexal masses at ultrasound: effect of MRI imaging findings on diagnostic thinking and therapeutic decisions.Eur Radiol. 2011 Jun;21(6):1301-10. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-2018-x. Epub 2010 Dec 21. Eur Radiol. 2011. PMID: 21174097
-
Ovarian dysgerminoma in two sisters.J Family Community Med. 2008 Sep;15(3):127-31. J Family Community Med. 2008. PMID: 23012179 Free PMC article.
-
ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up.Eur Radiol. 2010 Dec;20(12):2773-80. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1886-4. Epub 2010 Sep 14. Eur Radiol. 2010. PMID: 20839002 Review.
-
Role of Multidetector Computed Tomography in Evaluation of Ovarian Lesions in Women Clinically Suspected of Malignancy.Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2017 Aug 27;18(8):2059-2062. doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.8.2059. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2017. PMID: 28843221 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical