Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jul 13;57(7):708.
doi: 10.3390/medicina57070708.

Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Pathology: Standardized Methods and Different Levels of Experience

Indrė Tavoraitė  1 , Laura Kronlachner  2 , Gina Opolskienė  2 , Daiva Bartkevičienė  2
Affiliations

Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Pathology: Standardized Methods and Different Levels of Experience

Indrė Tavoraitė et al. Medicina (Kaunas). .

Abstract

Background and objectives: An expert's subjective assessment is still the most reliable evaluation of adnexal pathology, thus raising the need for methods less dependent on the examiner's experience. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of standardized methods when applied by examiners with different levels of experience and to suggest the most suitable method for less-experienced gynecologists. Materials and methods: This single-center retrospective study included 50 cases of histologically proven first-time benign or malignant adnexal pathology. Three examiners evaluated the same transvaginal ultrasound images: an expert (level III), a 4th year resident in gynecology (level I), and a final year medical student after basic training (labeled as level 0). The assessment methods included subjective evaluation, Simple Rules (SR) with and without algorithm, ADNEX and Gynecologic Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS) models. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive values with 95% confidence interval were calculated. Results: Out of 50 cases, 33 (66%) were benign and 17 (34%) were malignant adnexal masses. Using only SR, level III could classify 48 (96%), level I-41 (82%) and level 0-40 (80%) adnexal lesions. Using SR and algorithm, the performance improved the most for all levels and yielded sensitivity and specificity of 100% for level III, 100% and 97% for level I, 94.4% and 100% for level 0, respectively. Compared to subjective assessment, ADNEX lowered the accuracy of level III evaluation from 97.9% to 88% and GI-RADS had no impact. ADNEX and GI-RADS improved the sensitivity up to 100% for the less experienced; however, the specificity and accuracy were notably decreased. Conclusions: SR and SR+ algorithm have the most potential to improve not only sensitivity, but also specificity and accuracy, irrespective of the experience level. ADNEX and GI-RADS can yield sensitivity of 100%; however, the accuracy is decreased.

Keywords: adnexal pathology; experience; standardized methods; ultrasound.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sensitivity and specificity of different methods based on levels of experience.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Education and Practical Standards Committee. European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology Minimum training recommendations for the practice of medical ultrasound. Ultraschall Med Stuttg Ger 1980. 2006;27:79–105. - PubMed
    1. Knafel A., Banas T., Nocun A., Wiechec M., Jach R., Ludwin A., Kabzinska-Turek M., Pietrus M., Pitynski K. The Prospective External Validation of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules in the Hands of Level I and II Examiners. Ultraschall Med. Eur. J. Ultrasound. 2016;37:516–523. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1398773. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Meys E., Rutten I., Kruitwagen R., Slangen B., Lambrechts S., Mertens H., Nolting E., Boskamp D., Van Gorp T. Simple Rules, Not So Simple: The Use of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Terminology and Simple Rules in Inexperienced Hands in a Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study. Ultraschall Med. Eur. J. Ultrasound. 2017;38:633–641. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-113819. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sebajuri J.M.V., Magriples U., Small M., Ntasumbumuyange D., Rulisa S., Bazzett-Matabele L. Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents Can Accurately Classify Benign Ovarian Tumors Using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Rules. J. Ultrasound Med. Off. J. Am. Inst. Ultrasound Med. 2020;39:1389–1393. doi: 10.1002/jum.15234. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tinnangwattana D., Vichak-ururote L., Tontivuthikul P., Charoenratana C., Lerthiranwong T., Tongsong T. IOTA Simple Rules in Differentiating between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses by Non-expert Examiners. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2015;16:3835–3838. doi: 10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.9.3835. - DOI - PubMed