Suppr超能文献

超越影像:O-RADS、ADNEX、IOTA简易规则及RMI 4在鉴别附件区良恶性肿块中的表现——印度视角

Beyond the Image: Performance of O-RADS, ADNEX, IOTA Simple Rules & RMI 4 in differentiating benign and malignant adnexal masses - An Indian perspective.

作者信息

Khastgir Gaurav, Siwatch Sujata, Singh Tulika, Jain Vanita, Sikka Pooja, Srinivasan Radhika

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.

Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.

出版信息

Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2025 Sep;313:114585. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2025.114585. Epub 2025 Jul 19.

Abstract

AIM

To prospectively and externally validate O-RADS (Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System), RMI 4 (Risk of Malignancy Index), IOTA SR (International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Group Simple Rules) and ADNEX Rules (Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa), and compare their diagnostic accuracy in differentiating benign and malignant Adnexal Masses (AM) in the Indian population.

STUDY DESIGN

This single-centre diagnostic accuracy study included 100 consecutive consenting women with AM presenting to the gynaecology department at a tertiary care centre in Northern India. Every AM was classified as benign or malignant using O-RADS, RMI4, IOTA SR, and the ADNEX model (with CA 125). The reference standard was histopathological diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios and overall accuracy were determined for all systems among various age groups and histopathological subtypes.

RESULTS

Of the 100 women (mean age 42 ± 16.8 years) recruited, 45 had histopathologically benign lesions, 41 malignant and 14 borderline AM. O-RADS showed the highest sensitivity at 98 % (95 % CI: 87.4-99.5), followed by IOTA SR at 95 % (95 % CI: 83.8-98.6), RMI 4 at 88 % (95 % CI: 74.4-94.6), and ADNEX at 87.8 % (95 % CI: 73.8 %-95.9 %). However, ADNEX demonstrated the maximum specificity at 93 % (95 % CI: 81.7 %-98.6 %), followed by RMI 4 at 89 % (95 % CI: 76.5-95.1), IOTA SR at 87 % (95 % CI: 73.82-93.74), and O-RADS at 53 % (95 % CI: 39.1-67.1). Overall, ADNEX and IOTA SR showed the highest and similar diagnostic accuracy at 91 % (95 % CI: 82.7-95.2), followed by RMI 4 at 88 % (95 % CI: 79.9-93.5) and O-RADS at 74 % (95 % CI: 64.2-82.4).

CONCLUSION

The O-RADS, IOTA Simple Rules and ADNEX performed well in distinguishing benign from malignant adnexal masses in an Indian population among various age groups and histopathological subtypes. While O-RADS was the most sensitive, the ADNEX model showed the best specificity. Additionally, RMI 4 is a robust diagnostic tool with strong diagnostic accuracy, outlining the importance of its application in low-resource settings.

摘要

目的

前瞻性地对外验证卵巢附件报告和数据系统(O-RADS)、恶性风险指数4(RMI 4)、国际卵巢肿瘤分析组简易规则(IOTA SR)和附件规则(ADNEX规则),并比较它们在鉴别印度人群中良性和恶性附件包块(AM)方面的诊断准确性。

研究设计

这项单中心诊断准确性研究纳入了100例连续同意参与研究的患有附件包块的女性,她们就诊于印度北部一家三级医疗中心的妇科。每个附件包块均使用O-RADS、RMI4、IOTA SR和ADNEX模型(联合CA 125)分类为良性或恶性。参考标准为组织病理学诊断。确定了所有系统在不同年龄组和组织病理学亚型中的敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值、阳性和阴性似然比以及总体准确性。

结果

在招募的100例女性(平均年龄42±16.8岁)中,45例有组织病理学良性病变,41例为恶性,14例为交界性附件包块。O-RADS的敏感性最高,为98%(95%置信区间:87.4-99.5),其次是IOTA SR,为95%(95%置信区间:83.8-98.6),RMI 4为88%(95%置信区间:74.4-94.6),ADNEX为87.8%(95%置信区间:73.8%-95.9%)。然而,ADNEX的特异性最高,为93%(95%置信区间:81.7%-98.6%),其次是RMI 4,为89%(95%置信区间:76.5-95.1),IOTA SR为87%(95%置信区间:73.82-93.74),O-RADS为53%(95%置信区间:39.1-67.1)。总体而言,ADNEX和IOTA SR的诊断准确性最高且相似,为91%(95%置信区间:82.7-95.2),其次是RMI 4,为88%(95%置信区间:79.9-93.5),O-RADS为74%(95%置信区间:64.2-82.4)。

结论

在印度人群的不同年龄组和组织病理学亚型中,O-RADS、IOTA简易规则和ADNEX在鉴别良性和恶性附件包块方面表现良好。虽然O-RADS最敏感,但ADNEX模型的特异性最佳。此外,RMI 4是一种强大的诊断工具,具有较高的诊断准确性,凸显了其在资源匮乏地区应用的重要性。

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