Suppr超能文献

改良的包含肿瘤大小的恶性肿瘤风险指数在附件包块术前评估中的外部验证。

External validation of the adapted Risk of Malignancy Index incorporating tumor size in the preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses.

机构信息

Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011 Dec;159(2):422-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.07.035. Epub 2011 Aug 6.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) is a simple scoring system to standardize and improve the preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses. Since 1990, three versions of the RMI have been validated in different clinical studies. Recently, a fourth version of the RMI (RMI-4) was introduced that includes tumor size as an additional parameter. The aim of this study was to validate the ability of RMI-4 to discriminate between non-invasive lesions and invasive malignant adnexal masses, and to compare its performance with RMI-3.

STUDY DESIGN

Women scheduled for surgery for an adnexal mass between 2005 and 2009 in 11 hospitals were included. Ultrasonographic characteristics, menopausal status and serum CA 125 level were registered preoperatively, and combined into the RMI. The performances of RMI-3 and RMI-4 were assessed and statistically tested for differences.

RESULTS

A total of 643 patients were included: 469 benign, 73 borderline and 101 malignant tumors. The RMI-3 had a sensitivity of 76%, specificity of 82%, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of 45% and 95%, and an accuracy of 81%. The RMI-4 had a sensitivity of 74%, specificity of 79%, PPV of 40%, NPV of 94%, and an accuracy of 78%. The accuracy of RMI-3 was significantly higher than the accuracy of RMI-4 (p=.001). Both models had an area under the curve of 0.86.

CONCLUSION

Both RMI-3 and RMI-4 were able to discriminate between non-invasive lesions and invasive malignant adnexal masses, with similar performances. Including tumor size in the RMI does not improve its performance.

摘要

目的

风险恶性指数(RMI)是一种简单的评分系统,用于规范和改善附件肿块的术前评估。自 1990 年以来,该 RMI 已经在不同的临床研究中得到了验证。最近,引入了第四个版本的 RMI(RMI-4),其中包括肿瘤大小作为附加参数。本研究旨在验证 RMI-4 区分非侵袭性病变和侵袭性恶性附件肿块的能力,并将其与 RMI-3 的性能进行比较。

研究设计

纳入 2005 年至 2009 年在 11 家医院接受附件肿块手术的女性。术前登记超声特征、绝经状态和血清 CA125 水平,并组合成 RMI。评估 RMI-3 和 RMI-4 的性能,并对其差异进行统计学检验。

结果

共纳入 643 例患者:469 例良性,73 例交界性和 101 例恶性肿瘤。RMI-3 的敏感性为 76%,特异性为 82%,阳性和阴性预测值(PPV 和 NPV)分别为 45%和 95%,准确性为 81%。RMI-4 的敏感性为 74%,特异性为 79%,PPV 为 40%,NPV 为 94%,准确性为 78%。RMI-3 的准确性明显高于 RMI-4(p=0.001)。两种模型的曲线下面积均为 0.86。

结论

RMI-3 和 RMI-4 均能区分非侵袭性病变和侵袭性恶性附件肿块,性能相似。在 RMI 中加入肿瘤大小并不能提高其性能。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验