Comparison of three malignancy risk indices and CA-125 in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pelvic masses

被引：14
作者：
Bouzari Z. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Yazdani S. [1 ,3 ]
Ahmadi M.H. [1 ,3 ]
Barat S. [1 ,3 ]
Kelagar Z.S. [1 ,3 ]
Kutenaie M.J. [1 ,3 ]
Abbaszade N. [1 ,3 ]
Khajat F. [3 ]
机构：
[1] Department of OBandGYN, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol
[2] Stem Cell Researcher Center, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol
[3] BandGYN, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol
来源：
BMC Research Notes | / 4卷 / 1期
关键词：
Positive Predictive Value; Negative Predictive Value; Mucinous Adenocarcinoma; Pelvic Mass; Significant Linear Trend;
D O I：
10.1186/1756-0500-4-206
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Background: Patients with pelvic mass are the most referred patients to gynecologist. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of three malignancy risk indices (RMI 1, RMI 2 and RMI 3) and CA-125 to discriminate a benign from a malignant pelvic mass in our region (North of Iran). Methods. This retrospective study was performed on 182 women with pelvic masses referred to Yahyanejad Hospital from 2007 to 2009. Ultrasound scans were scored as one point for each of the following characteristics: multilocular cyst, solid areas, intra-abdominal metastases, ascites, and bilateral lesions. For each patient a total ultrasound score (U) was calculated. The difference of the three RMI was based on the allocation of the U and M scores. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of level of serum CA-125, the RMI 1, 2 and 3 were compared. Results: Mean age of the patients was 39.9 9.3 years. Most of them were premenopausal (161 women or 88.4%). A significant linear trend for malignancy was found by increasing age, ultrasound score, and serum CA-125. The best performance of CA125 was at a cut-off 88 U/ml, with a sensitivity of 88%, a specificity of 97%, a positive predictive value of 84%, and a negative predictive value of 99%. RMI 1 and 3 at the optimal cut off point of 265 and RMI2 at the optimal cut off point of 355, had a sensitivity of 91%, specificity of 96%, a positive predictive value of 78%, and a negative predictive value of 99%. Conclusion: In our population we found that there is no statistically significant difference in the performance of three malignancy risk indices (RMI 1, RMI 2, and RMI 3) and CA125 in differentiating between benign and malignant pelvic masses. © 2011 Yazdani et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
Obeidat B.R., Amarin Z.O., Latimer J.A., Crawford R.A., Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 85, 3, pp. 255-258, (2004)
[2]  
Greenlee R.T., Hill-Harmon M.B., Murray T., Thun M., Cancer Statistics, 2001, Ca-A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 51, 1, pp. 15-36, (2001)
[3]  
Landis S., Murray T., Bolden S., Wingo P.A., Cancer statistics, Cancer J Clin, 48, pp. 6-29, (1998)
[4]  
Goldstein S.R., Postmenopausal adnexal cysts: How clinical management has evolved, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 175, 6, pp. 1498-1501, (1996)
[5]  
Van Den Akker P., Aalders A., Snijders M., Kluivers K., Samlal R., Vollebergh J., Et al., Evaluation of the risk of malignancy index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses, Gynecologic Oncology, 116, 3, pp. 384-8, (2010)
[6]  
Jacobs I., Oram D., Fairbanks J., Turner J., Frost C., Grudzinskas J.G., A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 97, 10, pp. 922-929, (1990)
[7]  
Tingulstad S., Hagen B., Skjeldestad F.E., Onsrud M., Kiserud T., Halvorsen T., Nustad K., Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index based on serum CA125, ultrasound findings and menopausal status in the pre-operative diagnosis of pelvic masses, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 103, 8, pp. 826-831, (1996)
[8]  
Tingulstad S., Hagen B., Skjeldestad F., Halvorsen T., Nustad K., Onsrud M., The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 93, 3, (1999)
[9]  
Akdeniz N., Kuyumcuoglu U., Kale A., Erdemoglu M., Caca F., Risk of malignancy index for adnexal masses, European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 30, 2, pp. 178-80, (2009)
[10]  
Yamamoto Y., Yamada R., Oguri H., Maeda N., Fukaya T., Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pelvic masses, European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 144, 2, pp. 163-7, (2009)
12