Diagnostic accuracy of IOTA ultrasound morphology in the hands of less experienced sonographers

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 195-201

  Gramellini, Dandolo ^a,b   Fieni, Stefania ^b   Sanapo, Laura ^b   Casilla, Giovanna ^b   Verrotti, Carla ^b   Nardelli, Giovanni B ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF PARMA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PARMA   (Italy)

Author keywords

IOTA group; Ovarian tumours; Residents; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ADNEXA DISEASE; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE DIAGNOSIS; SOLID TUMOR;

ADNEXAL DISEASES; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; INTERNSHIP AND RESIDENCY; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, DOPPLER, COLOR;

EID: 41149159091     PISSN: 00048666     EISSN: 1479828X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2008.00829.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Valentin L. High-quality gynecological ultrasound can be highly beneficial, but poor-quality gynecological ultrasound can do harm. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999 13 : 1 7.
2. Finkler NJ, Benacerraf B, Lavin PT et al. Comparison of serum CA125, clinical impression, and ultrasound in the preoperative evaluationof ovarian masses. Obstet Gynecol 1998 72 : 659.
3. Sassone AM, Timor-Tritsch IE, Artner A, Westhoff C, Warren WB. Transvaginal sonographic characterization of ovarian disease: Evaluation of a new scoring system to predict ovarian malignancy. Obstet Gynecol 1991 78 : 70 76.
4. Lerner JP, Timor-Tritsch IE, Federman A, Abramovich G. Transvaginal ultrasonographic characterization of ovarian masses with an improved, weighted scoring system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994 170 : 81 85.
5. Ferrazzi E, Zanetta G, Dordoni D, Berlanda N, Mezzopane R, Lissoni AA. Transvaginal ultrasonographic characterization of ovarian masses: Comparison of five scoring systems in a multicenter study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997 10 : 192 197.
6. DePriest PD, Shenson D, Fried A et al. A morphology index based on sonographic findings in ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 1993 51 : 7 11.
7. Granberg S, Norstrom A, Wikland M. Tumors in the lower pelvis as imaged by vaginal sonography. Gynecol Oncol 1990 37 : 224 229.
8. Gramellini D, Fieni S, Piantelli G et al. Sonographic characterization, Doppler ultrasonography and tumor markers in the diagnosis of malignancy of ovarian masses. Minerva Ginecol 2001 53 : 1 11.
9. Granberg S, Wikland M, Jansson I. Macroscopic characterization of ovarian tumors and the relation to the histological diagnosis: Criteria to be used for ultrasound evaluation. Gynecol Oncol 1989 35 : 139 144.
10. Shepherd JH. Revised FIGO staging for gynaecological cancer. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989 96 : 889 892.
11. Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: A consensus opinion from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000 16 : 500 505.
12. Timmerman D. Lack of standardization in gynecological ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000 16 : 395 398.
13. Valentin L. Use of morphology to characterize and manage common adnexal masses. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2004 18 : 71 89.
14. Valentin L, Ameye L, Testa A et al. Ultrasound characteristics of different types of adnexal malignancies. Gynecol Oncol 2006 102 : 41 48.
15. Aslam N, Banerjee S, Carr JV, Savvas M, Hooper R, Jurkovic D. Prospective evaluation of logistic regression models for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2000 96 : 75 80.
16. Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T et al. Logistic regression model to distinguish between the benign and malignant adnexal mass before surgery: A multicenter study by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Group. J Clin Oncol 2005 23 : 8794 8801.
17. Valentin L, Ameye L, Jurkovic D et al. Which extrauterine pelvic masses are difficult to correctly classify as benign or malignant on the basis of ultrasound findings and is there a way of making a correct diagnosis? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006 27 : 438 444.