Subjective assessment versus ultrasound models to diagnose ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:195
作者
Meys, E. M. J. [1 ]
Kaijser, J. [2 ,3 ,7 ]
Kruitwagen, R. F. P. M. [1 ]
Slangen, B. F. M. [1 ]
Van Calster, B. [4 ]
Aertgeerts, B. [5 ]
Verbakel, J. Y. [5 ,6 ]
Timmerman, D. [2 ,3 ]
Van Gorp, T. [1 ]
机构
[1] MUMC, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, GROW Sch Oncol & Dev Biol, P Debyelaan 25, NL-6202 AZ Maastricht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Hosp KU Leuven, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Herestr 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[3] Univ Hosp KU Leuven, Leuven Canc Inst, Herestr 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[4] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Dev & Regenerat, Herestr 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[5] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Gen Practice, Kapucijnenvoer 33, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[6] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Hlth Sci, Woodstock Rd, Oxford OX2 6GG, England
[7] Montessoriweg 1, NL-3083 AN Rotterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Ovarian neoplasms; Ovarian cancer; Ultrasonography; Sensitivity and specificity; Systematic review; Meta-analysis; MALIGNANT ADNEXAL MASSES; IOTA SIMPLE RULES; 3-DIMENSIONAL POWER DOPPLER; PROSPECTIVE CROSS-VALIDATION; LOGISTIC-REGRESSION MODELS; EVALUATE PELVIC MASSES; TUMOR-ANALYSIS-GROUP; EXTERNAL VALIDATION; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; DIFFERENTIAL-DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejca.2016.01.007
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Introduction: Many national guidelines concerning the management of ovarian cancer currently advocate the risk of malignancy index (RMI) to characterise ovarian pathology. However, other methods, such as subjective assessment, International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) simple ultrasound-based rules (simple rules) and IOTA logistic regression model 2 (LR2) seem to be superior to the RMI. Our objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of subjective assessment, simple rules, LR2 and RMI for differentiating benign from malignant adnexal masses prior to surgery. Materials and methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched (January 1990 -August 2015). Eligibility criteria were prospective diagnostic studies designed to preoperatively predict ovarian cancer in women with an adnexal mass. Results: We analysed 47 articles, enrolling 19,674 adnexal tumours; 13,953 (70.9%) benign and 5721 (29.1%) malignant. Subjective assessment by experts performed best with a pooled sensitivity of 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-0.95) and specificity of 0.89 (95% CI 0.86 -0.92). Simple rules (classifying inconclusives as malignant) (sensitivity 0.93 [95% CI 0.91 -0.95] and specificity 0.80 [95% CI 0.77-0.82]) and LR2 (sensitivity 0.93 [95% CI 0.89 -0.95] and specificity 0.84 [95% CI 0.78-0.89]) outperformed RMI (sensitivity 0.75 [95% CI 0.72-0.79], specificity 0.92 [95% CI 0.88-0.94]). A two-step strategy using simple rules, when inconclusive added by subjective assessment, matched test performance of subjective assessment by expert examiners (sensitivity 0.91 [95% CI 0.89-0.93] and specificity 0.91 [95% CI 0.87-0.94]). Conclusions: A two-step strategy of simple rules with subjective assessment for inconclusive tumours yielded best results and matched test performance of expert ultrasound examiners. The LR2 model can be used as an alternative if an expert is not available. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:17 / 29
页数:13
相关论文
共 84 条
[1]   Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the detection of malignant ovarian masses [J].
Akturk, Erhan ;
Karaca, Riza Efendi ;
Alanbay, Ibrahim ;
Dede, Murat ;
Karasahin, Emre ;
Yenen, Mufit Cemal ;
Baser, Iskender .
JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2011, 22 (03) :177-182
[2]   IOTA simple rules for discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal masses: prospective external validation [J].
Alcazar, J. L. ;
Pascual, M. A. ;
Olartecoechea, B. ;
Graupera, B. ;
Auba, M. ;
Ajossa, S. ;
Hereter, L. ;
Julve, R. ;
Gaston, B. ;
Peddes, C. ;
Sedda, F. ;
Piras, A. ;
Saba, L. ;
Guerriero, S. .
ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2013, 42 (04) :467-471
[3]  
Alcazar JL, 2013, ULTRASOUND OBSTET GY
[4]   Risk of Malignancy Index in the preoperative evaluation of patients with adnexal masses [J].
Andersen, ES ;
Knudsen, A ;
Rix, P ;
Johansen, B .
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2003, 90 (01) :109-112
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2011, Obstet Gynecol, V117, P742, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821477db
[6]   Pre-Operative Evaluation of Ovarian Tumors by Risk of Malignancy Index, CA125 and Ultrasound [J].
Arun-Muthuvel, Veluswamy ;
Jaya, Vijayaraghavan .
ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION, 2014, 15 (06) :2929-2932
[7]  
Ashrafgangooei T, 2011, ASIAN PAC J CANCER P, V12, P1727
[8]  
Asif Naveed, 2004, J Coll Physicians Surg Pak, V14, P128
[9]   Prospective evaluation of three different models for the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian cancer [J].
Aslam, N ;
Tailor, A ;
Lawton, F ;
Carr, J ;
Savvas, M ;
Jurkovic, D .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2000, 107 (11) :1347-1353
[10]   Performance of laparoscopy in identifying malignant ovarian cysts [J].
Bensaid, C. ;
Belda, M. A. Le Frere ;
Metzger, U. ;
Larousserie, F. ;
Clement, D. ;
Chatellier, G. ;
Lecuru, F. .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2006, 20 (09) :1410-1414