ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Sonographic Assessment of Complex Ultrasound Morphology Adnexal Tumors in Pregnant Women with the Use of IOTA Simple Rules Risk and ADNEX Scoring Systems
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic imaging of adnexal lesions in pregnancy: systematic review.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026Pooled it
- MOCRA: A multi-algorithm clinical decision support system for the early detection of ovarian cancer.Journal of ovarian research · 2025Article
- Review
- Advancements in artificial intelligence for ultrasound diagnosis of ovarian cancer: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Evaluating use of two-step International Ovarian Tumor Analysis strategy to classify adnexal masses identified in pregnancy: pilot study.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2024Article
- Adnexal Masses in Pregnancy: A Single-Centre Prospective Observational Cohort Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The diagnostic performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis: Simple Rules for diagnosing ovarian tumors-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- ADNEX risk prediction model for diagnosis of ovarian cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of external validation studies.BMJ medicine · 2024Article
- Comparative diagnostic accuracy of the IOTA SRR and LR2 scoring systems for discriminating between malignant and Benign Adnexal masses by junior physicians in Chinese patients: a retrospective observational study.BMC women's health · 2023Observational
- Ultrasound Features and Clinical Outcome of Patients with Ovarian Masses Diagnosed during Pregnancy: Experience of Single Gynecological Ultrasound Center.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ultrasonographic ovarian mass scoring system for predicting malignancy in pregnant women with ovarian mass.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the accuracy of subjective assessment (SA), the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group Simple Rules Risk (SRR) and the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model for the preoperative differentiation of adnexal masses in pregnant women.
methodsThe study population comprised 36 pregnant women (median age: 28.5 years old, range: 20-42 years old) with a mean gestation age of 13.5 (range: 8-31) weeks at diagnosis. Tumors were prospectively classified by local sonographers as probably benign or probably malignant using SA. Final tumor histological diagnosis was used as the reference standard in all cases. Logistic regression SRR and ADNEX models were used to obtain a risk score for every case. Serum CA125 and human epidydimis protein 4 (HE4) concentrations were also retrieved and the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) value was calculated. The calculated predictive values included positive and negative likelihood ratios of ultrasound and biochemical tests.
resultsFinal histology confirmed 27 benign and 9 malignant (including 2 borderline) masses. The highest sensitivity (89%) and specificity (70%) were found for the subjective tumor assessment. Although no malignancy was classified as benign using the SRR criteria (sensitivity = 100%), the specificity of this scoring system was only 37%. At the cut-off risk level of >20%, the ADNEX model had a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 70%. Serum levels of CA125, HE4 and the ROMA risk model correctly identified adnexal malignant tumors with a sensitivity of 67%, 25% and 25%, respectively. Corresponding specificities were 72%, 100% and 100%, respectively. The highest positive and negative likelihood ratios were found for SA (LR+ = 3.0 and LR- = 0.16, respectively). Overall diagnostic accuracy of all predictive methods used in this study were similar (range: 70-75%) except for SRR (53%).
conclusionSubjective assessment remains the best predictive method in complex adnexal masses found at prenatal ultrasound in pregnant women. For less experienced sonographers, both the SRR and ADNEX scoring systems may be also used for the characterization of such tumors, while serum tumor markers CA125 and HE4, along with the ROMA algorithm appear to be less accurate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.