卵巢附件报告数据系统（O-RADS）与IOTA简单规则及ADNEX模型对附件包块进行分类的诊断性能比较：一项直接对比的Meta分析
Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Ovarian Adnexal Reporting Data System (O-RADS) With IOTA Simple Rules and ADNEX Model for Classifying Adnexal Masses: A Head-To-Head Meta-Analysis.
作者信息
Almeida Gisela, Bort Mar, Alcázar Juan Luis
机构信息
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar de Setubal, Setubal, Portugal.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Castellón, Spain.
出版信息
J Clin Ultrasound. 2025 Apr 29. doi: 10.1002/jcu.24048.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the diagnostic accuracy of O-RADS (Ovarian Reporting and Data System) and IOTA (international Ovarian Tumor Analysis group) simple rules (SR) and ADNEX (Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adnexa) model for discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses using meta-analysis.
METHODS
A systematic search of studies comparing O-RADS with SR and/or ADNEX in the same set of patients with an adnexal mass was performed in Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from January 2020 to September 2023. Quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Quantitative meta-analysis was performed.
RESULTS
Nine articles comprising 3924 women (3979 adnexal masses) were ultimately included after exclusions. Three studies compared O-RADS versus SR, three studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX, and three studies compared all three methods. The risk of bias was high for patient selection in QUADAS-2 in all studies. Six studies compared O-RADS versus SR; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS and IOTA SR were 94.0% and 77.0%, and 91.0% and 87.0%, respectively. p = 0.2204). Six studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS classification system and ADNEX were 95.0% and 79.0%, and 91.0% and 88.0%, respectively. p = 0.2307).
CONCLUSION
O-RADS classification has a similar diagnostic performance to IOTA SR and ADNEX for discriminating benign and malignant adnexal masses.
目的
通过荟萃分析比较卵巢影像报告和数据系统（O-RADS）、国际卵巢肿瘤分析组（IOTA）简易规则（SR）以及附件区不同肿瘤评估（ADNEX）模型鉴别附件区肿块良恶性的诊断准确性。
方法
于2020年1月至2023年9月在Medline、科学网和Scopus数据库中对在同一组附件区肿块患者中比较O-RADS与SR和/或ADNEX的研究进行系统检索。使用QUADAS-2工具评估质量。进行定量荟萃分析。
结果
排除后最终纳入9篇文章，共3924名女性（3979个附件区肿块）。3项研究比较了O-RADS与SR，3项研究比较了O-RADS与ADNEX，3项研究比较了所有三种方法。所有研究中QUADAS-2评估的患者选择偏倚风险均较高。6项研究比较了O-RADS与SR；未发现显著差异（O-RADS和IOTA SR的合并敏感度和特异度分别为94.0%和77.0%，以及91.0%和87.0%。p = 0.2204）。6项研究比较了O-RADS与ADNEX；未发现显著差异（O-RADS分类系统和ADNEX的合并敏感度和特异度分别为95.0%和79.0%，以及91.0%和88.0%。p = 0.2307）。
结论
在鉴别附件区肿块良恶性方面，O-RADS分类与IOTA SR和ADNEX具有相似的诊断性能。
Zotero 插件