Suppr超能文献

评估附件包块的恶性肿瘤风险:O-RADS 和 ADNEX 模型、SA、RMI 的验证及比较。

Evaluating the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses: validation of O-RADS and comparison with ADNEX model, SA, and RMI.

机构信息

Department of Abdominal Ultrasound, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Shandong Province, China.

出版信息

Ginekol Pol. 2023;94(10):799-806. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2023.0019. Epub 2023 Mar 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic value of Ovarian-adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS), and to compare it with Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adnexa (ADNEX) model, Subjective Assessment (SA), and Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) in differentiating benign and malignant adnexal masses (AMs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ultrasound characteristics of 445 patients included in the study were retrospectively analyzed and evaluated using diagnostic models. The diagnostic performances of ultrasound diagnostic models were measured by assessing, receiver-operating characteristic curves, sensitivities, positive predictive values, positive likelihood ratios, specificities, negative predictive values, and negative likelihood ratios. Kappa values were used to evaluate inter-reviewer agreement (IRA).

RESULTS

Of the 445 AMs, 265 were benign and 180 were malignant. The area under the curve (AUC) of O-RADS (0.941), ADNEX model (0.925), and SA (0.931) were higher than RMI (0.815) (all p < 0.05). The sensitivity of O-RADS (93.3%), ADNEX model (94.4%), and SA (96.1%) were higher than RMI (70.6%) (p > 0.05), and there was no statistical significance among them (p > 0.05). The specificity of O-RADS, ADNEX model, SA, and RMI was 90.2%, 90.6%, 90.2%, and 92.5%, respectively, with no statistical significance (p > 0.05). All four ultrasound diagnostic methods showed better IRA.

CONCLUSIONS

O-RADS, ADNEX model and SA have better diagnostic value in differentiating benign and malignant AMs than RMI.

摘要

目的

评估卵巢-附件报告和数据系统(O-RADS)的诊断价值,并将其与附件不同肿瘤评估(ADNEX)模型、主观评估(SA)和恶性肿瘤风险指数(RMI)在鉴别良恶性附件肿块(AMs)中的表现进行比较。

材料与方法

回顾性分析了纳入研究的 445 例患者的超声特征,并使用诊断模型进行评估。通过评估受试者工作特征曲线、敏感度、阳性预测值、阳性似然比、特异度、阴性预测值和阴性似然比来测量超声诊断模型的诊断性能。使用 Kappa 值评估了两位审阅者之间的一致性(IRA)。

结果

在 445 个 AMs 中,265 个为良性,180 个为恶性。O-RADS(0.941)、ADNEX 模型(0.925)和 SA(0.931)的曲线下面积(AUC)均高于 RMI(0.815)(均 p<0.05)。O-RADS(93.3%)、ADNEX 模型(94.4%)和 SA(96.1%)的敏感度均高于 RMI(70.6%)(p>0.05),且无统计学差异(p>0.05)。O-RADS、ADNEX 模型、SA 和 RMI 的特异度分别为 90.2%、90.6%、90.2%和 92.5%,差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。所有四种超声诊断方法的 IRA 均较好。

结论

与 RMI 相比,O-RADS、ADNEX 模型和 SA 在鉴别良恶性 AMs 方面具有更好的诊断价值。

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