Prospective external validation of the 'ovarian crescent sign' as a single ultrasound parameter to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal pathology
- PMID: 20217895
- DOI: 10.1002/uog.7625
Prospective external validation of the 'ovarian crescent sign' as a single ultrasound parameter to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal pathology
Abstract
Objective: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the 'ovarian crescent sign' (OCS)-a rim of normal ovarian tissue seen adjacent to an ipsilateral adnexal mass-as a sonographic feature to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses.
Methods: The patients included were a subgroup of patients participating in the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Phase 2 study, which is an international multicenter study. The subgroup comprised 1938 patients, with an adnexal mass, recruited from 19 ultrasound centers in different countries. All patients were scanned using the same standardized ultrasound protocol. Information on more than 40 demographic and ultrasound variables were collected, but the evaluation of the OCS was optional. Only patients from centers that had evaluated the OCS in > or = 90% of their cases were included. The gold standard was the histological diagnosis of the adnexal mass. The ability of the OCS to discriminate between borderline or invasively malignant vs. benign adnexal masses, as well as between invasively malignant vs. other (benign and borderline) tumors, was determined and compared with the performance of subjective evaluation of ultrasound findings by the ultrasound examiner.
Results: The OCS was evaluated in 1377 adnexal masses from 12 centers, 938 (68%) masses being benign, 86 (6%) borderline, 305 (22%) primary invasive and 48 (3%) metastases. The OCS was present in 398 (42%) of 938 benign masses, in 14 (16%) of 86 borderline tumors, in 18 (6%) of 305 primary invasive tumors (one malignant struma ovarii, one uterine clear cell adenocarcinoma and 16 epithelial carcinomas, i.e. four Stage I and 12 Stage II-IV) and in two (4%) of 48 ovarian metastases. Hence, the sensitivity and specificity for absent OCS to identify a malignancy was 92% and 42%, respectively, and the positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-, respectively) were 1.60 and 0.18. Subjective impression performed significantly better than the OCS. Sensitivity and specificity were 90% and 92%, respectively, LR+ was 11.0 and LR- was 0.10. For discrimination between invasive vs. benign or borderline tumors, the sensitivity for absent OCS was 94%, the specificity was 40%, the LR+ was 1.58 and the LR- was 0.14.
Conclusion: This study confirms previous reports that the presence of the OCS decreases the likelihood of invasive malignancy in adnexal masses. However it is a poor discriminator between benign and malignant adnexal masses.
Copyright 2010 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Value of ultrasonographic detection of normal ovarian tissue in the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses in pediatric patients.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jul;36(1):88-92. doi: 10.1002/uog.7557. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010. PMID: 20069549
-
Ovarian cancer prediction in adnexal masses using ultrasound-based logistic regression models: a temporal and external validation study by the IOTA group.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Aug;36(2):226-34. doi: 10.1002/uog.7636. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010. PMID: 20455203 Clinical Trial.
-
Adnexal masses difficult to classify as benign or malignant using subjective assessment of gray-scale and Doppler ultrasound findings: logistic regression models do not help.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Oct;38(4):456-65. doi: 10.1002/uog.9030. Epub 2011 Sep 13. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011. PMID: 21520475
-
[Sonographic diagnosis of presumed benign ovarian tumors].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2013 Dec;42(8):730-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2013.09.028. Epub 2013 Nov 5. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2013. PMID: 24200073 Review. French.
-
[Doppler ultrasonography in the diagnosis of ovarian cysts: indications, pertinence and diagnostic criteria].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2001 Nov;30(1 Suppl):S20-33. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2001. PMID: 11917373 Review. French.
Cited by
-
Fertility-sparing surgery in children and adolescents with borderline ovarian tumors: a retrospective study.J Ovarian Res. 2024 May 8;17(1):96. doi: 10.1186/s13048-024-01409-0. J Ovarian Res. 2024. PMID: 38720349 Free PMC article.
-
Spontaneous subcapsular and perirenal haemorrhage with retroperitoneal haematoma in a patient with ovarian melanoma metastases.BMJ Case Rep. 2021 Jan 27;14(1):e238983. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2020-238983. BMJ Case Rep. 2021. PMID: 33504529 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of selected ultrasonographic parameters and marker levels in the preoperative differentiation of borderline ovarian tumors and ovarian cancers.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012 Dec;286(6):1513-9. doi: 10.1007/s00404-012-2453-9. Epub 2012 Jul 21. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012. PMID: 22821506 Free PMC article.
-
An Ultrasound-Based Preoperative Evaluation of the Endometriosis Fertility Index: A Further Step towards Personalized Treatment.J Clin Med. 2024 Mar 5;13(5):1488. doi: 10.3390/jcm13051488. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 38592325 Free PMC article.
-
Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Data System Magnetic Resonance Imaging (O-RADS MRI) Score for Risk Stratification of Sonographically Indeterminate Adnexal Masses.JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Jan 3;3(1):e1919896. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.19896. JAMA Netw Open. 2020. PMID: 31977064 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical