Management of a suspicious adnexal mass: A clinical practice guideline

Current Oncology

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2012, Pages

  Dodge, J E ^a   Covens, A L ^b   Lacchetti, C ^c   Elit, L M ^c   Le, T ^d   Devries Aboud, M ^e   Fung Kee Fung, M ^d  

^a PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b DEPARTMENT OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY   (Canada)

^c MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^e Guelph Family Health Team   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adnexal mass; Identification; Surgery; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

CA 125 ANTIGEN;

ARTICLE; CANCER MORPHOLOGY; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL FEATURE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; DOPPLER ECHOGRAPHY; FROZEN SECTION; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LYMPHADENECTOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVARY CANCER; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; SALPINGOOOPHORECTOMY; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION;

EID: 84865176028     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17187729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3747/co.19.980     Document Type: Article

References (164)

1. Canadian Cancer Society's Steering Committee. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2010. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2010.
2. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (sign). Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A National Clinical Guideline. No. 75. Edinburgh, Scotland: sign; 2003.
3. Myers ER, Bastian LA, Havrilesky LJ, et al. Management of adnexal mass. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 2006;1-145.
4. Fung Kee Fung M, Bryson P, Johnston M, Chambers A, and the members of the Gynecology Cancer Disease Site Group. Screening Postmenopausal Women for Ovarian Cancer. Evidence summary report no. 4-6a. Toronto, ON: Cancer Care Ontario; 2004.
5. Browman GP, Levine MN, Mohide EA, et al. The practice guidelines development cycle: a conceptual tool for practice guidelines development and implementation. J Clin Oncol 1995;13:502-512.
6. Australia, Department of Health and Ageing, Australian Cancer Network, National Breast Cancer Centre (nbcc). Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Women with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. Camperdown, Australia: nbcc; 2004.
7. Geomini P, Bremer G, Kruitwagen R, Mol BW. Diagnostic accuracy of frozen section diagnosis of the adnexal mass: a metaanalysis. Gynecol Oncol 2005;96:1-9.
8. Liu J, Xu Y, Wang J. Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 2007;62:328-334.
9. Geomini P, Kruitwagen R, Bremer GL, Cnossen J, Mol BW. The accuracy of risk scores in predicting ovarian malignancy: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2009;113:384-394.
10. Medeiros LR, Rosa DD, Edelweiss MI, et al. Accuracy of frozen-section analysis in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a systematic quantitative review. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2005;15:192-202.
11. Chan JK, Munro EG, Cheung MK, et al. Association of lymphadenectomy and survival in stage i ovarian cancer patients. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:12-19.
12. Chan J, Fuh K, Shin J, et al. The treatment and outcomes of early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: have we made any progress? Br J Cancer 2008;98:1191-1196.
13. Cho YH, Kim DY, Kim JH, et al. Is complete surgical staging necessary in patients with stage i mucinous epithelial ovarian tumors? Gynecol Oncol 2006;103:878-882.
14. Hornung R, Urs E, Serenella E, et al. Analysis of potential prognostic factors in 111 patients with ovarian cancer. Cancer Lett 2004;206:97-106.
15. Maggioni A, Benedetti Panici P, Dell'Anna T, et al. Randomised study of systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer macroscopically confined to the pelvis. Br J Cancer 2006;95:699-704.
16. Oksefjell H, Sandstad B, Tropé C. Is the watch and wait approach adequate after comprehensive surgical staging in invasive stage i epithelial ovarian cancer? The Norwegian Radium Hospital experience. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2008;29:583-589.
17. Skírnisdóttir I, Sorbe B. Lymph node sampling is of prognostic value in early stage epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2005;26:181-185.
18. Suzuki S, Kajiyama H, Shibata K, et al. Is there any association between retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy and survival benefit in ovarian clear cell carcinoma patients? Ann Oncol 2008;19:1284-1287.
19. Wong HF, Low JJ, Chua Y, Busmanis I, Tay EH, Ho TH. Ovarian tumors of borderline malignancy: a review of 247 patients from 1991 to 2004. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007;17:342-349.
20. Desfeux P, Camatte S, Chatellier G, Blanc B, Querleu D, Lécuru F. Impact of surgical approach on the management of macroscopic early ovarian borderline tumors. Gynecol Oncol 2005;98:390-395.
21. Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Uccella S, et al. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the surgical management of apparent early stage ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007;105:409-413.
22. Lécuru F, Desfeux P, Camatte S, Bissery A, Blanc B, Querleu D. Impact of initial surgical access on staging and survival of patients with stage i ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16:87-94.
23. Park JY, Bae J, Lim MC, et al. Laparoscopic and laparotomic staging in stage i epithelial ovarian cancer: a comparison of feasibility and safety. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008;18:1202-1209.
24. Romagnolo C, Gadducci A, Sartori E, Zola P, Maggino T. Management of borderline ovarian tumors: results of an Italian multicenter study. Gynecol Oncol 2006;101:255-260.
25. Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT, Nam JH. Surgical management of borderline ovarian tumors: the role of fertility-sparing surgery. Gynecol Oncol 2009;113:75-82.
26. Yinon Y, Beiner ME, Gotlieb WH, Korach Y, Perri T, Ben-Baruch G. Clinical outcome of cystectomy compared with unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy as fertility-sparing treatment of borderline ovarian tumors. Fertil Steril 2007;88:479-484.
27. Cohen LS, Escobar PF, Scharm C, Glimco B, Fishman DA. Three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound improves the diagnostic accuracy for ovarian cancer prediction. Gynecol Oncol 2001;82:40-48.
28. Wilson WD, Valet AS, Andreotti RF, Green-Jarvis B, Lyshchik A, Fleischer AC. Sonographic quantification of ovarian tumor vascularity. J Ultrasound Med 2006;25:1577-1581.
29. Geomini PM, Kluivers KB, Moret E, Bremer GL, Kruitwagen RF, Mol BW. Evaluation of adnexal masses with three-dimensional ultrasonography. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:1167-1175.
30. Laban M, Metawee H, Elyan A, Kamal M, Kamel M, Mansour G. Three-dimensional ultrasound and three-dimensional power Doppler in the assessment of ovarian tumors. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007;99:201-205.
31. Alcázar JL, Galán MJ, García-Manero M, Guerriero S. Threedimensional sonographic morphologic assessment in complex adnexal masses: preliminary experience. J Ultrasound Med 2003;22:249-254.
32. Kurjak A, Kupesić S. Three dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler in assessment of uterine and ovarian angiogenesis: a prospective study. Croat Med J 1999;40:413-420.
33. Kurjak A, Kupesic S, Sparac V, Kosuta D. Three-dimensional ultrasonographic and power Doppler characterization of ovarian lesions. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;16:365-371.
34. Alcázar JL, Castillo G. Comparison of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional power-Doppler imaging in complex adnexal masses for the prediction of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:807-812.
35. Bazot M, Nassar-Slaba J, Thomassin-Naggara I, Cortez A, Uzan S, Daraï E. MR imaging compared with intraoperative frozen-section examination for the diagnosis of adnexal tumors; correlation with final histology. Eur Radiol 2006;16:2687-2699.
36. Chen M, Wang WC, Zhou C, et al. Differentiation between malignant and benign ovarian tumors by magnetic resonance imaging. Chin Med Sci J 2006;21:270-275.
37. Guerra A, Cunha TM, Félix A. Magnetic resonance evaluation of adnexal masses. Acta Radiol 2008;49:700-709.
38. Tsili AC, Tsampoulas C, Argyropoulou M, et al. Comparative evaluation of multidetector ct and mr imaging in the differentiation of adnexal masses. Eur Radiol 2008;18:1049-1057.
39. Booth SJ, Turnbull LW, Poole DR, Richmond I. The accurate staging of ovarian cancer using 3T magnetic resonance imaging-a realistic option. BJOG 2008;115:894-901.
40. Umemoto M, Shiota M, Shimono T, Hoshiai H. Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors, focusing on the solid area based on diagnostic imaging. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2006;32:195-201.
41. Scoutt LM, McCarthy SM, Lange R, Bourque A, Schwartz PE. MR evaluation of clinically suspected adnexal masses. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1994;18:609-618.
42. Buist MR, Golding RP, Burger CW, et al. Comparative evaluation of diagnostic methods in ovarian carcinoma with emphasis on ct and mri. Gynecol Oncol 1994;52:191-198.
43. Fenchel S, Grab D, Nuessle K, et al. Asymptomatic adnexal masses: correlation of fdg pet and histopathologic findings. Radiology 2002;223:780-788.
44. Grab D, Flock F, Stöhr I, et al. Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Gynecol Oncol 2000;77:454-459.
45. Hata K, Hata T, Manabe A, Sugimura K, Kitao M. A critical evaluation of transvaginal Doppler studies, transvaginal sonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and CA125 in detecting ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:922-926.
46. Hricak H, Chen M, Coakley FV, et al. Complex adnexal masses: detection and characterization with MR imaging- multivariate analysis. Radiology 2000;214:39-46.
47. Huber S, Medl M, Baumann L, Czembirek H. Value of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative evaluation of suspected ovarian masses. Anticancer Res 2002;22:2501-2507.
48. Jain KA, Friedman DL, Pettinger TW, Alagappan R, Jeffrey RB Jr, Sommer FG. Adnexal masses: comparison of specificity of endovaginal us and pelvic mr imaging. Radiology 1993;186:697-704.
49. Komatsu T, Konishi I, Mandai M, et al. Adnexal masses: transvaginal us and gadolinium-enhanced mr imaging assessment of intratumoral structure. Radiology 1996;198:109-115.
50. Kurtz AB, Tsimikas JV, Tempany CM, et al. Diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer: comparative values of Doppler and conventional us, ct, and mr imaging correlated with surgery and histopathologic analysis-report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 1999;212:19-27.
51. Medl M, Kulenkampff KJ, Stiskal M, Peters-Engl C, Leodolter S, Czembirek H. Magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative evaluation of suspected ovarian masses. Anticancer Res 1995;15:1123-1125.
52. Reuter M, Steffens J, Schüppler U, et al. Critical evaluation of the specificity of mri and tvus for differentiation of malignant from benign adnexal lesions. Eur Radiol 1998;8:39-44.
53. Yamashita Y, Torashima M, Hatanaka Y, et al. Adnexal masses: accuracy of characterization with transvaginal us and precontrast and postcontrast mr imaging. Radiology 1995;194:557-565.
54. Kawahara K, Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, et al. Evaluation of positron emission tomography with tracer 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in addition to magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in selected women after ultrasonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004;28:505-516.
55. Sohaib SA, Mills TD, Sahdev A, et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in patients with adnexal masses. Clin Radiol 2005;60:340-348.
56. Rieber A, Nüssle K, Stöhr I, et al. Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors with mr imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:123-129.
57. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of integrated fdg-pet/contrast-enhanced ct in staging ovarian cancer: comparison with enhanced ct. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1912-1920.
58. Lin JY, Angel C, DuBeshter B, Walsh CJ. Diagnoses after laparotomy for a mass in the pelvic area in women. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1993;176:333-338.
59. Alcázar JL, Errasti T, Zornoza A, Mínguez JA, Galán MJ. Transvaginal color Doppler ultrasonography and CA- 125 in suspicious adnexal masses. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1999;66:255-261.
60. Alcázar JL, Ruiz-Perez ML, Errasti T. Transvaginal color Doppler sonography in adnexal masses: which parameter performs best? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1996;8:114-119.
61. Alcázar JL, López-García G. Transvaginal color Doppler assessment of venous flow in adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001;17:434-438.
62. Anandakumar C, Chew S, Wong YC, Chia D, Ratnam SS. Role of transvaginal ultrasound color flow imaging and Doppler waveform analysis in differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1996;7:280-284.
63. Berlanda N, Ferrari MM, Mezzopane R, et al. Impact of a multiparameter, ultrasound-based triage on surgical management of adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;20:181-185.
64. Bromley B, Goodman H, Benacerraf BR. Comparison between sonographic morphology and Doppler waveform for the diagnosis of ovarian malignancy. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:434-437.
65. Buy JN, Ghossain MA, Hugol D, et al. Characterization of adnexal masses: combination of color Doppler and conventional sonography compared with spectral Doppler analysis alone and conventional sonography alone. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996;166:385-393.
66. Carter JR, Lau M, Fowler JM, Carlson JW, Carson LF, Twiggs LB. Blood flow characteristics of ovarian tumors: implications for ovarian cancer screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:901-907.
67. Chou CY, Chang CH, Yao BL, Kuo HC. Color Doppler ultrasonography and serum CA125 in the differentiation of benign and malignant ovarian tumors. J Clin Ultrasound 1994;22:491-496.
68. Franchi M, Beretta P, Ghezzi F, Zanaboni F, Goddi A, Salvatore S. Diagnosis of pelvic masses with transabdominal color Doppler, CA125 and ultrasonography. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1995;74:734-739.
69. Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Piras S, et al. Three-dimensional quantification of tumor vascularity as a tertiary test after Bmode and power Doppler evaluation for detection of ovarian cancer. J Ultrasound Med 2007;26:1271-1278.
70. Hata K, Hata T, Kitao M. Intratumoral peak systolic velocity as a new possible predictor for detection of adnexal malignancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:1496-1500.
71. Jain KA. Prospective evaluation of adnexal masses with endovaginal gray-scale and duplex and color Doppler us: correlation with pathologic findings. Radiology 1994;191:63-67.
72. Kurjak A, Zalud I, Alfirevic Z. Evaluation of adnexal masses with transvaginal color ultrasound. J Ultrasound Med 1991;10:295-297.
73. Kurjak A, Predanić M. New scoring system for prediction of ovarian malignancy based on transvaginal color Doppler sonography. J Ultrasound Med 1992;11:631-638.
74. Leeners B, Schild RL, Funk A, et al. Colour Doppler sonography improves the pre-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumours made using conventional transvaginal sonography. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1996;64:79-85.
75. Marchesini AC, Magrio FA, Berezowski AT, Neto OB, Nogueira AA, Candido dos Reis FJ. A critical analysis of Doppler velocimetry in the differential diagnosis of malignant and benign ovarian masses. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2008;17:97-102.
76. Marret H, Sauget S, Giraudeau B, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography helps in discrimination of benign from malignant adnexal masses. J Ultrasound Med 2004;23:1629-1639.
77. Mercé LT, Caballero RA, Barco MJ, Bau S, López G. B-Mode, utero-ovarian and intratumoural transvaginal colour Doppler ultrasonography for differential diagnosis of ovarian tumours. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1998;76:97-107.
78. Mousavi AS, Borna S, Moeinoddini S. Estimation of probability of malignancy using a logistic model combining color Doppler ultrasonography, serum CA125 level in women with a pelvic mass. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16(suppl 1):92-98.
79. Prömpeler HJ, Madjar H, Sauerbrei W. Classification of adnexal tumors by transvaginal color Doppler. Gynecol Oncol 1996;61:354-363.
80. Schneider VL, Schneider A, Reed KL, Hatch KD. Comparison of Doppler with two-dimensional sonography and CA 125 for prediction of malignancy of pelvic masses. Obstet Gynecol 1993;81:983-988.
81. Stein SM, Laifer-Narin S, Johnson MB, et al. Differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses: relative value of gray-scale, color Doppler, and spectral Doppler sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995;164:381-386.
82. Takac I. Analysis of blood flow in adnexal tumors by using color Doppler imaging and pulsed spectral analysis. Ultrasound Med Biol 1998;24:1137-1141.
83. Tekay A, Jouppila P. Validity of pulsatility and resistance indices in classification of adnexal tumors with transvaginal color Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1992;2:338-344.
84. Tepper R, Lerner-Geva L, Altaras MM, et al. Transvaginal color flow imaging in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. J Ultrasound Med 1995;14:731-734.
85. Timor-Tritsch LE, Lerner JP, Monteagudo A, Santos R. Transvaginal ultrasonographic characterization of ovarian masses by means of color flow-directed Doppler measurements and a morphologic scoring system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:909-913.
86. Valentin L. Comparison of Lerner score, Doppler ultrasound examination, and their combination for discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;15:143-147.
87. Valentin L. Pattern recognition of pelvic masses by gray-scale ultrasound imaging: the contribution of Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999;14:338-347.
88. Wu CC, Lee CN, Chen TM, Lai JI, Hsieh CY, Hsieh FJ. Factors contributing to the accuracy in diagnosing ovarian malignancy by color Doppler ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol 1994;84:605-608.
89. Zanetta G, Vergani P, Lissoni A. Color Doppler ultrasound in the preoperative assessment of adnexal masses. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1994;73:637-641.
90. Hillaby K, Aslam N, Salim R, Lawrence A, Raju KS, Jurkovic D. The value of detection of normal ovarian tissue (the "ovarian crescent sign") in the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004;23:63-67.
91. 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.
92. DePriest PD, Shenson D, Fried A, et al. A morphology index based on sonographic findings in ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 1993;51:7-11.
93. 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.
94. 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.
95. Finkler NJ, Benacerraf B, Lavin PT, Wojciechowski C, Knapp RC. Comparison of serum CA125, clinical impression, and ultrasound in the preoperative evaluation of ovarian masses. Obstet Gynecol 1988;72:659-664.
96. Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J, Turner J, Frost C, Grudzinskas JG. A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:922-929.
97. Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, et al. Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index based on serum CA125, ultrasound findings and menopausal status in the pre-operative diagnosis of pelvic masses. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996;103:826-831.
98. Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, Halvorsen T, Nustad K, Onsrud M. The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:448-452.
99. Bensaid C, Le Frère Belda MA, et al. Performance of laparoscopy in identifying malignant ovarian cysts. Surg Endosc 2006;20:1410-1414.
100. Van Holsbeke C, Van Calster B, Valentin L, et al. External validation of mathematical models to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal tumors: a multicenter study by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Group. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:4440-447.
101. Asif N, Sattar A, Dawood MM, Rafi T, Aamir M, Anwar M. Pre-operative evaluation of ovarian mass: risk of malignancy index. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2004;14:128-131.
102. Davies AP, Jacobs I, Woolas R, Fish A, Oram D. The adnexal mass: benign or malignant? Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;100:927-931.
103. Manjunath AP, Pratapkumar, Sujatha K, Vani R. Comparison of three risk of malignancy indices in evaluation of pelvic masses. Gynecol Oncol 2001;81:225-229.
104. Morgante G, la Marca A, Ditto A, De Leo V. Comparison of two malignancy risk indices based on serum CA125, ultrasound score and menopausal status in the diagnosis of ovarian masses. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:524-527.
105. Aslam N, Tailor A, Lawton F, Carr J, Savvas M, Jurkovic D. Prospective evaluation of three different models for the preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. BJOG 2000;107:1347-1353.
106. Mol BW, Boll D, De Kanter M, et al. Distinguishing the benign and malignant adnexal mass: an external validation of prognostic models. Gynecol Oncol 2001;80:162-167.
107. Timmerman D, Bourne TH, Tailor A, et al. A comparison of methods for preoperative discrimination between malignant and benign adnexal masses: the development of a new logistic regression model. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:57-65.
108. Engelen MJ, Bongaerts AH, Sluiter WJ, et al. Distinguishing benign and malignant pelvic masses: the value of different diagnostic methods in everyday clinical practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008;136:94-101.
109. Obeidat BR, Amarin ZO, Latimer JA, Crawford RA. Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004;85:255-258.
110. Patsner B, Mann WJ. The value of preoperative serum CA 125 levels in patients with a pelvic mass. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988;159:873-876.
111. Adonakis GL, Paraskevaidis E, Tsiga S, Seferiadis K, Lolis DE. A combined approach for the early detection of ovarian cancer in asymptomatic women. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1996;65:221-225.
112. Benjapibal M, Neungton C. Pre-operative prediction of serum CA125 level in women with ovarian masses. J Med Assoc Thai 2007;90:1986-1991.
113. Romagnolo C, Trivella G, Bonacina M, Fornalè M, Maggino T, Ferrazzi E. Preoperative diagnosis of 221 consecutive ovarian masses: scoring system and expert evaluation. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2006;27:487-489.
114. Zhang Z, Yu Y, Xu F, et al. Combining multiple serum tumor markers improves detection of stage i epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007;107:526-531.
115. Milojkovic M, Hrgovic Z, Hrgovic I, Jonat W, Maass N, Buković D. Significance of CA125 serum level in discrimination between benign and malignant masses in the pelvis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2004;269:176-180.
116. Erdoǧan N, Ozçelik B, Serin IS, Akgün M, Oztürk F. Doppler ultrasound assessment and serum cancer antigen 125 in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;91:146-150.
117. Balbi GC, Musone R, Menditto A, et al. Women with a pelvic mass: indicators of malignancy. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2001;22:459-462.
118. Chalas E, Welshinger M, Engellener W, Chumas J, Barbieri R, Mann WJ. The clinical significance of thrombocytosis in women presenting with a pelvic mass. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;166:974-977.
119. Chen DX, Schwartz PE, Li XG, Yang Z. Evaluation of CA125 levels in differentiating malignant from benign tumors in patients with pelvic masses. Obstet Gynecol 1988;72:23-27.
120. Doed JR, Quinn MA, Rome R, Koh H. Women with a pelvic mass-when to perform an ultrasound. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;33:404-407.
121. Einhorn N, Bast RC Jr, Knapp RC, Tjernberg B, Zurawski VR Jr. Preoperative evaluation of serum CA 125 levels in patients with primary epithelial ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1986;67:414-416.
122. Gadducci A, Capriello P, Bartolini T, et al. The association of ultrasonography and CA-125 test in the preoperative evaluation of ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1988;9:373-376.
123. Gadducci A, Ferdeghini M, Prontera C, et al. The concomitant determination of different tumor markers in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and benign ovarian masses: relevance for differential diagnosis. Gynecol Oncol 1992;44:147-154.
124. Gadducci A, Ferdeghini M, Rispoli G, Prontera C, Bianchi R, Fioretti P. Comparison of tumor-associated trypsin inhibitor (tati) with CA125 as a marker for diagnosis and monitoring of epithelial ovarian cancer. Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl 1991;207:19-24.
125. Hogdall EV, Høgdall CK, Tingulstad S, et al. Predictive values of serum tumour markers tetranectin, OVX1, CASA and CA125 in patients with a pelvic mass. Int J Cancer 2000;89:519-523.
126. Woolas RP, Conaway MR, Xu F, et al. Combinations of multiple serum markers are superior to individual assays for discriminating malignant from benign pelvic masses. Gynecol Oncol 1995;59:111-116.
127. Zhang Z, Barnhill SD, Zhang H, et al. Combination of multiple serum markers using an artificial neural network to improve specificity in discriminating malignant from benign pelvic masses. Gynecol Oncol 1999;73:56-61.
128. Hurteau JA, Woolas RP, Jacobs IJ, et al. Soluble interleukin-2 receptor alpha is elevated in sera of patients with benign ovarian neoplasms and epithelial ovarian cancer. Cancer 1995;76:1615-1620.
129. Kawai M, Kikkawa F, Ishikawa H, et al. Differential diagnosis of ovarian tumors by transvaginal color-pulse Doppler sonography. Gynecol Oncol 1994;54:209-214.
130. Maggino T, Gadducci A, D'Addario V, et al. Prospective multicenter study on CA125 in postmenopausal pelvic masses. Gynecol Oncol 1994;54:117-123.
131. Malkasian Jr GD, Knapp RC, Lavin PT, et al. Preoperative evaluation of serum CA 125 levels in premenopausal and postmenopausal patients with pelvic masses: discrimination of benign from malignant disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988;159:341-346.
132. Mancuso A, De Vivo A, Triolo O, Irato S. The role of transvaginal ultrasonography and serum CA 125 assay combined with age and hormonal state in the differential diagnosis of pelvic masses. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2004;25:207-210.
133. O'Connell GJ, Ryan E, Murphy KJ, Prefontaine M. Predictive value of CA125 for ovarian carcinoma in patients presenting with pelvic masses. Obstet Gynecol 1987;70:930-932.
134. Pyrgiotis E, Salamalekis E, Loghis C, Dima C, Zourlas PA. CA 125 in preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1993;14:279-282.
135. Roman LD, Muderspach LI, Stein SM, Laifer-Narin S, Groshen S, Morrow CP. Pelvic examination, tumor marker level, and gray-scale and Doppler sonography in the prediction of pelvic cancer. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:493-500.
136. Schutter EM, Davelaar EM, van Kamp GJ, Verstraeten RA, Kenemans P, Verheijen RH. The differential diagnostic potential of a panel of tumor markers (CA125, CA 15-3, and CA 72-4 antigens) in patients with a pelvic mass. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:385-392.
137. Schutter EM, Kenemans P, Sohn C, et al. Diagnostic value of pelvic examination, ultrasound, and serum CA125 in postmenopausal women with a pelvic mass. An international multicenter study. Cancer 1994;74:1398-1406.
138. Schutter EM, Sohn C, Kristen P, et al. Estimation of probability of malignancy using a logistic model combining physical examination, ultrasound, serum CA125, and serum CA 72-4 in postmenopausal women with a pelvic mass: an international multicenter study. Gynecol Oncol 1998;69:56-63.
139. Sengoku K, Satoh T, Saitoh S, Abe M, Ishikawa M. Evaluation of transvaginal color Doppler sonography, transvaginal sonography and CA125 for prediction of ovarian malignancy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1994;46:39-43.
140. Smikle CB, Lunt CC, Hankins GD. Clinical predictors in the evaluation of a pelvic mass. Mil Med 1995;160:233-235.
141. Soper JT, Hunter VJ, Daly L, Tanner M, Creasman WT, Bast RC Jr. Preoperative serum tumor-associated antigen levels in women with pelvic masses. Obstet Gynecol 1990;75:249-254.
142. Tay SK, Chua EK. Correlation of serum, urinary and salivary CA125 levels in patients with adnexal masses. Ann Acad Med Singapore 1994;23:311-314.
143. Tian J, Zhang J, Jiao L, Li Y, Cao L. A prospective study of Tc-99m mibi in the differential diagnosis of pelvic masses in female patients. Clin Nucl Med 2000;25:614-618.
144. Torres JC, Derchain SF, Faundes A, Gontijo RC, Martinez EZ, Andrade LA. Risk-of-malignancy index in preoperative evaluation of clinically restricted ovarian cancer. Sao Paulo Med J 2002;120:72-76.
145. Vasilev SA, Schlaerth JB, Campeau J, Morrow CP. Serum CA 125 levels in preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses. Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:751-756.
146. Wakahara F, Kikkawa F, Nawa A, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of tumor markers, sonography, and intraoperative frozen section for ovarian tumors. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2001;52:147-152.
147. Weiner Z, Thaler I, Beck D, Rottem S, Deutsch M, Brandes JM. Differentiating malignant from benign ovarian tumors with transvaginal color f low imaging. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:159-162.
148. El-Shalakany A, Abou-Talib Y, Shalaby HS, Sallam M. Preoperative serum inhibin levels in patients with ovarian tumors. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2004;30:155-161.
149. Nakae M, Iwamoto I, Fujino T, et al. Preoperative plasma osteopontin level as a biomarker complementary to carbohydrate antigen 125 in predicting ovarian cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2006;32:309-314.
150. NIH consensus conference. Ovarian cancer. Screening, treatment, and follow-up. nih Consensus Development Panel on Ovarian Cancer. JAMA 1995;273:491-497.
151. Naik R, Cross P, Lopes A, Godfrey K, Hatem MH. "True" versus "apparent" stage i epithelial ovarian cancer: value of frozen section analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16(suppl 1):41-46.
152. Boriboonhirunsarn D, Sermboon A. Accuracy of frozen section in the diagnosis of malignant ovarian tumor. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2004;30:394-399.
153. Brun JL, Cortez A, Rouzier R, et al. Factors influencing the use and accuracy of frozen section diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:244.e1-e7.
154. Wootipoom V, Dechsukhum C, Hanprasertpong J, Lim A. Accuracy of intraoperative frozen section in diagnosis of ovarian tumors. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89:577-582.
155. Yarandi F, Eftekhar Z, Izadi-Mood N, Shojaei H. Accuracy of intraoperative frozen section in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2008;48:438-441.
156. Ghaemmaghami F, Fakour F, Karimi Zarchi M, et al. Clinical assessment, gross examination, frozen section of ovarian masses: do patients benefit? Arch Gynecol Obstet 2008;278:209-213.
157. Wasinghon P, Suthippintawong C, Tuipae S. The accuracy of intraoperative frozen sections in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. J Med Assoc Thai 2008;91:1791-1815.
158. Ilvan S, Ramazanoglu R, Ulker Akyildiz E, Calay Z, Bese T, Oruc N. The accuracy of frozen section (intraoperative consultation) in the diagnosis of ovarian masses. Gynecol Oncol 2005;97:395-399.
159. Stewart CJ, Brennan BA, Hammond IG, Leung YC, McCartney AJ. Intraoperative assessment of ovarian tumors: a 5-year review with assessment of discrepant diagnostic cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2006;25:216-222.
160. Geomini PM, Zuurendonk LD, Bremer GL, de Graaff J, Kruitwagen RF, Mol BW. The impact of size of the adnexal mass on the accuracy of frozen section diagnosis. Gynecol Oncol 2005;99:362-366.
161. Fanfani F, Zannoni GF, Fagotti A, et al. Importance of a specialized pathologist for the examination of frozen sections of adnexal masses. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007;17:1034-1039.
162. Tangjitgamol S, Jesadapatrakul S, Manusirivithaya S, Sheanakul C. Accuracy of frozen section in diagnosis of ovarian mass. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2004;14:212-219.
163. Taskiran C, Erdem O, Onan A, et al. The role of frozen section evaluation in the diagnosis of adnexal mass. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008;18:235-240.
164. Canis M, Mashiach R, Wattiez A, et al. Frozen section in laparoscopic management of macroscopically suspicious ovarian masses. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2004;11:365-369.