Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38609573›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2024

O-RADS MRI scoring system: key points for correct application in inexperienced hands.

Lledó Cabedo, Carmen Sebastià, Meritxell Munmany, Pere Fusté, Lydia Gaba, Adela Saco, Adela Rodriguez, Blanca Paño, Carlos Nicolau

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. O-RADS for assessment of adnexal lesions: current status, challenges and future directions.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lledó CabedoDepartment of Radiology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Carmen SebastiàDepartment of Radiology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain. msebasti@clinic.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3153-4350
Meritxell MunmanyDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Pere FustéDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Lydia GabaDepartment of Oncology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Adela SacoDepartment of Pathology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Adela RodriguezDepartment of Oncology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Blanca PañoDepartment of Radiology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Carlos NicolauDepartment of Radiology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, C/Villarroel, Barcelona, 170 08036, Spain.
Hospital Clínic de Barcelona · ES

Funding

Hospital Clínic de Barcelona Contractes Final de resifencai "Josep Font-Emili Letang" 2023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of the O-RADS MRI criteria in the stratification of risk of malignancy of solid or sonographically indeterminate ovarian masses and assess the interobserver agreement of this classification between experienced and inexperienced radiologists.

methodsThis single-centre retrospective study included patients from 2019 to 2022 with sonographically indeterminate or solid ovarian masses who underwent MRI with a specific protocol for characterisation according to O-RADS MRI specifications. Each study was evaluated using O-RADS lexicon by two radiologists, one with 17 years of experience in gynaecological radiology and another with 4 years of experience in general radiology. Findings were classified as benign, borderline, or malignant according to histology or stability over time. Diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement were assessed.

resultsA total of 183 patients with US indeterminate or solid adnexal masses were included. Fifty-seven (31%) did not have ovarian masses, classified as O-RADS 1. The diagnostic performance for scores 2-5 was excellent with a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 97.4%, 100%, 96.2%, and 100%, respectively by the experienced radiologist and 96.1%, 92.0%, 93.9%, and 94.8% by the inexperienced radiologist. Interobserver concordance was very high (Kappa index 0.92). Almost all the misclassified cases were due to misinterpretation of the classification similar to reports in the literature.

conclusionThe diagnostic performance of O-RADS MRI determined by either experienced or inexperienced radiologists is excellent, facilitating decision-making with high diagnostic accuracy and high reproducibility. Knowledge of this classification and use of assessment tools could avoid frequent errors due to misinterpretation. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Up to 31% of ovarian masses are considered indeterminate by transvaginal US and 32% of solid lesions considered malignant by transvaginal US are benign. The O-RADs MRI accurately classifies these masses, even when used by inexperienced radiologists, thereby avoiding incorrect surgical approaches. KEY POINTS: • O-RADS MRI accurately classifies indeterminate and solid ovarian masses by ultrasound. • There is excellent interobserver agreement between experienced and non-experienced radiologists. • O-RADS MRI is a helpful tool to assess clinical decision-making in ovarian tumours.

Indexed as

CancerMRIOvary

Identifiers

PMID38609573
PMCPMC11014836
OpenAlexW4394747702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.