ArticleGland surgery2022
Systematic review and meta-analysis of imaging differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors.
Article in Gland surgery, 2022. 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.
- Performance of MRI protocols for diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- The use of MRI in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Ovarian Tumor Biomarkers: Correlation Between Tumor Type and Marker Expression, and Their Role in Guiding Therapeutic Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Giant Ovarian Leiomyoma Mimicking a Malignant Intra-Abdominal Tumor.The American journal of case reports · 2025Article
- Ovarian masses suggested for MRI examination: assessment of deep learning models based on non-contrast-enhanced MRI sequences for predicting malignancy.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- The Impact of Surgery Delay on Early-Stage Ovarian Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- An algorithm for the pre-operative differentiation of benign ovarian tumours based on magnetic resonance imaging interpretation in a regional core hospital: A retrospective study.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023Article
- Diagnostic imaging of adnexal masses in pregnancy.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2023Article
- Clinical Significance of the Combination of Serum HE4 Levels, Hemoglobin-to-Red Cell Distribution Width Ratio, and CT Imaging for the Pretreatment Assessment of Adnexal Masses.Journal of Cancer · 2023Article
- The Discrepancy between Preoperative Tumor Markers and Imaging Outcomes in Predicting Ovarian Malignancy.Cancers · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the increasing incidence of gynecological ovarian tumors, the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors is of great significance for subsequent treatment. Currently, ovarian examinations commonly use computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This study sought to compare the value of CT and MRI in differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and Weipu databases were searched for published articles using the following terms "CT" or "Computed Tomography" or "MRI" or "Magnetic Resonance imaging" and "ovarian cancer" or "ovarian tumor" or "ovarian neoplasm" or "adnexal mass" or "adnexal lesion". The articles were screened and the data were extracted based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies, and the network meta-analysis was performed by Stata 15.0. Results: The results showed that the overall sensitivity and specificity of CT were 0.79 [95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.70-0.87] and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.80-0.92), respectively. The overall sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.95) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.90-0.93), respectively. The area under the curve of the CT and MRI summary receiver operating characteristics were 0.9016 and 0.9764, respectively. The positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio of CT were 5.26 (95% CI: 2.78-9.93), 0.26 (95% CI: 0.13-0.50), and 22.19 (95% CI: 7.54-65.30), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio of MRI were 8.69 (95% CI: 5.06-14.92), 0.07 (95% CI: 0.04-0.13), and 146.19 (95% CI: 68.88-310.24), respectively. Conclusions: Compared to CT, MRI has a stronger ability to differentiate between benign and malignant ovarian tumors. It's a promising non-radiological imaging technique and a more favorable choice for patients with ovarian tumors. However, in the future, large-sample, multi-center prospective studies need to be conducted to compare the performance of MRI and CT in distinguishing between benign and malignant ovarian tumors.
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.