OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare intraoperative and postoperative outcomes in women undergoing removal of adnexal structures by either posterior culdotomy or abdominal extraction.
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study conducted via medical record review. Demographic, clinical, and operative variables were abstracted from the medical records. Statistical analysis consisted of descriptive statistics, Fisher\'s exact tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and multivariable logistic regression models.
METHODS: Single academic tertiary care center between 2010 and 2022.
METHODS: A total of 718 patients were identified and included in our analysis who underwent minimally invasive ovarian cystectomy or oophorectomy. Patients were excluded if they underwent concomitant hysterectomy.
METHODS: Patients underwent minimally invasive oophorectomy or ovarian cystectomy, and specimens were extracted by either abdominal extraction or culdotomy extraction.
RESULTS: Of the 718 patients who met inclusion criteria, 127 (17.7%) underwent culdotomy extraction and 591 (82.3%) underwent abdominal extraction. The culdotomy extraction group had longer operative times (113 minutes vs 96 minutes, p<0.001) and higher estimated blood loss (25 milliliters vs 10 milliliters, p<0.001) compared to the abdominal extraction group. There were more malignancies in the culdotomy extraction than the abdominal extraction group (15.7% vs 8.1%, respectively, p<0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, those who underwent culdotomy extraction were more likely to have two or more clinic visits (OR 2.89; 95% CI, 1.66-5.03; p<0.001) and call or message the clinic (OR 2.08; 95% CI, 1.35-3.20; p<0.001). There were no incidences of cuff dehiscence, cuff cellulitis, or pelvic abscess in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Removal of adnexal specimens via abdominal port site or posterior culdotomy incision is a feasible option for specimen extraction and can be individualized based on patient and surgeon preference and patient factors. Those undergoing culdotomy extraction may require more preoperative counseling due to higher rate of postoperative messages seen in our cohort.

Calcifying fibrous pseudotumors (CFT) are rare benign lesions diagnosed by histological and immunohistochemical studies. Our case presents a rare detection of a CFT in the parietal peritoneum. These lesions can be falsely interpreted as myomas or adnexal masses and thus gynecologists should be aware of the existence of CFTs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a multimodal assay combining serum microRNA with protein biomarkers and metadata improves triage assessment of an adnexal mass.
METHODS: Serum samples from 468 training subjects (191 cancer cases and 277 benign adnexal mass controls or healthy controls) were analyzed for seven protein biomarkers and 180 miRNA. Circulating analyte data were combined with age and menopausal status (metadata) into a neural network model to classify samples as cases or controls. Forward regression with ten-fold cross-validation minimized the dimensionality of the model while maximizing linear separation between cases and controls. Model validation proceeded using both internal (44 cases and 56 controls) and external validation sets (51 cases and 59 controls).
RESULTS: The total study population comprised 678 subjects, including 286 cases and 392 controls. Overall, 290 (43%) of the subjects were premenopausal. A panel of 10 miRNA delivered optimal performance when combined with protein and metadata features. The combined model improved the Receiver Operator Characteristic Area Under the Curve (ROC AUC) on the internal (AUC = 0.9; 95% CI 0.81-0.95) and external validation sets (AUC = 0.95; 95% CI 0.90-0.98) compared to miRNA alone or proteins plus metadata (without miRNA). On external validation, the combined model offered 92% sensitivity at 80% specificity overall, with 80% and 100% sensitivity for early and late-stage cancers, respectively, including 78% sensitivity for early-stage, serous ovarian cancers and 82% sensitivity for early-stage, non-serous cancers.
CONCLUSIONS: A multimodal assay combining miRNA with protein biomarkers, age, and menopausal status improves surgical triage of an adnexal mass.

Sclerosing stromal tumors are a rare type of ovarian tumor in the category of sex cord stromal tumors, which arise from the ovarian connective tissue. This report concerns a case of a sclerosing stromal tumor in a 19-year-old nulliparous woman who presented with the chief complaints of menstrual irregularities and dyspareunia. Preoperative imaging revealed a complex right adnexal mass with blood flow and without associated ascites. Tumor markers were all normal except lactate dehydrogenase, which was elevated. The elevated lactate dehydrogenase, in combination with patient age and menstrual irregularities, initially misdirected the clinicians toward suspicion for dysgerminoma or other malignant germ cell tumor of the ovary. Clinicians should beware of excluding the diagnosis of sex cord stromal tumor on the differential in a young person with an adnexal mass and elevated lactate dehydrogenase.

暂无摘要。

After the introduction of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), several studies with diverse characteristics have been published to assess its diagnostic performance. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of O-RADS MRI scoring for adnexal masses, accounting for the risk of selection bias.
The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for eligible studies. Borderline or malignant lesions were considered malignant. All O-RADS MRI scores ≥4 were considered positive. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio (LR) values were calculated, considering the risk of selection bias.
Fifteen eligible studies were found, and five of them had a high risk of selection bias. Between-study heterogeneity was low-to-moderate for sensitivity but substantial for specificity (I2 values were 35.5% and 64.7%, respectively). The pooled sensitivity was significantly lower in the studies with a low risk of bias compared with those with a high risk of bias (93.0% and 97.5%, respectively; P = 0.043), whereas the pooled specificity was not different (90.4% for the overall population). The negative and positive LRs were 0.08 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05–0.11] and 10.0 (95% CI 7.7–12.9), respectively, for the studies with low risk of bias and 0.03 (95% CI 0.01–0.10) and 10.3 (95% CI 3.8–28.3), respectively, for those with high risk of bias.
The overall diagnostic performance of the O-RADS system is very high, particularly for ruling out borderline/malignant lesions, but with a moderate ruling-in potential. Studies with a high risk of selection bias lead to an overestimation of sensitivity.
The O-RADS system demonstrates considerable diagnostic performance, particularly in ruling out borderline or malignant lesions, and should routinely be used in practice. The high between-study heterogeneity observed for specificity suggests the need for improvement in the consistent characterization of the benign lesions to reduce false positive rates.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate the diagnostic accuracy of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model in Japanese women, population with a distinct adnexal mass distribution compared with European women, and to evaluate the model\'s utility by gynecology trainees and ultrasound specialists.
METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study analyzed ultrasound data from January 2017 to March 2020 of 206 women with adnexal masses. Patients who underwent ultrasonography and serum CA-125 measurement and received postsurgery histological diagnosis were included. The ADNEX model\'s diagnostic performance was evaluated by two trainees and two specialists using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and measures of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for overall performance and each examiner.
RESULTS: Of the 206 included Japanese women, the prevalence of malignancy was 30.1%, including borderline cases. The overall AUC for distinguishing malignancy was 0.848 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.817-0.880). The AUC for each examiner ranged from 0.791 to 0.898, with Specialist 2 showing the highest accuracy and sensitivity varying between 0.677 and 0.839. A moderate degree of agreement was noted among the four examiners (Fleiss\' kappa was 0.586). The performance of trainees and specialists differed significantly in evaluating the solid tissue and the papillary projections in both malignant and benign groups (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: The IOTA ADNEX model effectively differentiates benign and malignant adnexal masses in Japanese women. Although the accuracy matched up moderately among the four examiners, better accuracy is expected with training in evaluating solid tissue and papillary projections.

Asymptomatic adnexal masses are commonly encountered in daily radiology practice. Although the vast majority of these masses are benign, a small subset have a risk of malignancy, which require gynecologic oncology referral for best treatment outcomes. Ultrasound, using a combination of both transabdominal, transvaginal, and duplex Doppler technique can accurately characterize the majority of these lesions. MRI with and without contrast is a useful complementary modality that can help characterize indeterminate lesions and assess the risk of malignancy is those that are suspicious. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

UNASSIGNED: IOTA proposed Simple Ultrasound Rules in 2009 for preoperative diagnosis of ovarian masses based on ultrasound only. It is an accurate, simple and inexpensive method. RMI, however, requires CA125 level. While RMI-4 is the latest, RMI-1 is still the most widely used method. The present study was done to compare IOTA Rules with RMI-1 and RMI-4.
UNASSIGNED: To differentiate benign and malignant adnexal masses preoperatively using IOTA simple rules and compare its accuracy with RMI-1 and RMI-4.
UNASSIGNED: A prospective observational study was performed from 1st November 2019 to 31st March 2021 in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, ABVIMS and Dr. RML Hospital, New Delhi. This study was conducted on 70 patients with adnexal masses who underwent pre-operative evaluation using IOTA Simple Rules, RMI-1 and RMI-4. Histopathology was used to compare the results.
UNASSIGNED: Out of 70 patients, 59 (84.3%) cases were benign and 11 (15.7%) were malignant. The IOTA Rules were applicable to 60 cases (85.7%), and the results were inconclusive in 10 cases (14.3%). Where applicable, the sensitivity and specificity of the IOTA Rules (88.9% and 94.1%, respectively) were significantly higher than RMI-1 (45.5% and 93.2%, respectively) and RMI-4 (45.5% and 89.8%, respectively). When inconclusive results were included as malignant, the sensitivity of the IOTA Rules increased (88.9% vs 90.9%); however, the specificity decreased (94.1% vs 81.4%).
UNASSIGNED: IOTA Simple Rules were more accurate at diagnosing benign from malignant adnexal masses than RMI-1 and RMI-4. However, the rules were not applicable to 14% of the cases.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the experience of a tertiary health center about the management of adnexal masses that have been diagnosed during pregnancy or detected accidentally during cesarean delivery.
METHODS: This is a retrospective review of 160 women who underwent concurrent surgery for adnexal mass during cesarean section, 24 women who delivered vaginally and subsequently had surgery due to the prenatal diagnosis of adnexal mass and 10 women who underwent surgery for adnexal mass during pregnancy. Corresponding to the delivery and surgery times, 200 women who had no diagnosis of pregnancy-associated adnexal mass served as controls.
RESULTS: The women in the control group and study groups had statistically similar gestational age at delivery, birth weight and preterm delivery (p > 0.05 for all). Miscarriage was significantly more frequent in women undergoing surgery for adnexal mass during pregnancy (p = 0.001). The women who had surgery for adnexal mass during pregnancy, at the time of cesarean section and following delivery were statistically similar with respect to surgery type and histopathological diagnosis (p > 0.05 for both). Malignancy was detected in none of the patients who underwent surgery for adnexal mass during pregnancy. Acute abdomen was the indication for the emergency surgery in six patients (3.5%) who had surgery for adnexal mass during pregnancy. Four patients (2.4%) had surgery for adnexal mass during pregnancy due to the high index of suspicion for malignancy.
CONCLUSIONS: The risk of malignancy was relatively lower in this cohort of adnexal masses detected during pregnancy and cesarean delivery. Surgical management of adnexal masses should be postponed to postpartum period as such management leads to an increased risk of miscarriage. Unless there is a need for emergent surgery or cancer staging, vaginal delivery should be encouraged in women diagnosed with adnexal mass during pregnancy.