Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Buy, M. Ghossain, C. Sciot, M. Bazot, C. Guinet, S. Prévôt, D. Hugol, M. Laromiguière, J. Truc, P. Poitout (1991)
Epithelial tumors of the ovary: CT findings and correlation with US.Radiology, 178 3
M. Bazot, E. Daraï, J. Nassar-Slaba, C. Lafont, I. Thomassin-Naggara (2008)
Value of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis of Ovarian Tumors: A ReviewJournal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 32
B. Goff, L. Mandel, H. Muntz, C. Melancon (2000)
Ovarian carcinoma diagnosisCancer, 89
J. Engel, Robert Eckel, G. Schubert‐Fritschle, J. Kerr, W. Kuhn, J. Diebold, Rainer Kimmig, J. Rehbock, D. Hölzel (2002)
Moderate progress for ovarian cancer in the last 20 years: prolongation of survival, but no improvement in the cure rate.European journal of cancer, 38 18
K Jain, D Friedman, T Pettinger, R. Alagappan, R Jeffrey, F Sommer (1993)
Adnexal masses: comparison of specificity of endovaginal US and pelvic MR imaging.Radiology, 186 3
F. Berrino, R. Angelis, M. Sant, S. Rosso, M. Bielska-Lasota, J. Coebergh, M. Santaquilani (2007)
Survival for eight major cancers and all cancers combined for European adults diagnosed in 1995-99: results of the EUROCARE-4 study.The Lancet. Oncology, 8 9
H. Marret, S. Sauget, B. Giraudeau, M. Brewer, J. Ranger-Moore, G. Body, F. Tranquart (2004)
Contrast‐Enhanced Sonography Helps in Discrimination of Benign From Malignant Adnexal MassesJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 23
A. Tsili, C. Tsampoulas, A. Charisiadi, J. Kalef-Ezra, V. Dousias, E. Paraskevaidis, S. Efremidis (2008)
Adnexal masses: accuracy of detection and differentiation with multidetector computed tomography.Gynecologic oncology, 110 1
Mary Lopez, Alvydas Mikulskis, S. Kuzdzal, E. Golenko, E. Petricoin, L. Liotta, Wayne Patton, G. Whiteley, K. Rosenblatt, Prem Gurnani, A. Nandi, Samuel Neill, Stuart Cullen, M. O'Gorman, D. Sarracino, Christopher Lynch, A. Johnson, W. Mckenzie, D. Fishman (2007)
A novel, high-throughput workflow for discovery and identification of serum carrier protein-bound peptide biomarker candidates in ovarian cancer samples.Clinical chemistry, 53 6
R. Miller, J. Nash, E. Weiser, W. Hoskins (1991)
The postmenopausal palpable ovary syndrome. A retrospective review with histopathologic correlates.The Journal of reproductive medicine, 36 8
(2006)
Report on the results of treatment in gynaecological cancer, volume 26: carcinoma of the ovary
T. Bourne, S. Campbell, C. Steer, M. Whitehead, W. Collins (1989)
Transvaginal colour flow imaging: a possible new screening technique for ovarian cancer.British Medical Journal, 299
M. Ordén, J. Jurvelin, P. Kirkinen (2003)
Kinetics of a US contrast agent in benign and malignant adnexal tumors.Radiology, 226 2
U. Hamper, S. Sheth, F. Abbas, N. Rosenshein, D. Aronson, R. Kurman (1993)
Sonography of the Fetal Heart: Normal Variants and PitfallsJournal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, 9
C. Enakpene, A. Omigbodun, T. Goecke, Akin-tunde Odukogbe, M. Beckmann (2009)
Preoperative evaluation and triage of women with suspicious adnexal masses using risk of malignancy indexJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research, 35
S. Kupesic, A. Kurjak (2000)
Contrast‐Enhanced, Three‐Dimensional Power Doppler Sonography for Differentiation of Adnexal MassesObstetrics & Gynecology, 96
A. Reles, Ulrike Wein, W. Lichtenegger (1997)
Transvaginal color Doppler sonography and conventional sonography in the preoperative assessment of adnexal massesJournal of Clinical Ultrasound, 25
A. Testa, G. Ferrandina, E. Fruscella, C. Holsbeke, E. Ferrazzi, F. Leone, D. Arduini, C. Exacoustos, D. Bokor, G. Scambia, D. Timmerman (2005)
The Use of Contrasted Transvaginal Sonography in the Diagnosis of Gynecologic DiseasesJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 24
A. Frega, F. Rech, D. French (2006)
Imiquimod treatment of vulvitis circumscripta plasmacellularisInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 95
I. Jacobs, D. Oram, J. Fairbanks, J. Turner, C. Frost, J. Grudzinskas (1991)
A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancerInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 35
A. Fleischer, A. Lyshchik, H. Jones, M. Crispens, M. Loveless, R. Andreotti, Phillip Williams, D. Fishman (2008)
Contrast‐Enhanced Transvaginal Sonography of Benign Versus Malignant Ovarian MassesJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 27
S. Risum, C. Høgdall, A. Loft, A. Berthelsen, E. Høgdall, L. Nedergaard, L. Lundvall, S. Engelholm (2007)
The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer--a prospective study.Gynecologic oncology, 105 1
L. Valentin (2004)
Use of morphology to characterize and manage common adnexal masses.Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology, 18 1
K. Kinkel, H. Hricak, Ying Lu, K. Tsuda, R. Filly (2000)
US characterization of ovarian masses: a meta-analysis.Radiology, 217 3
L. Roman, L. Muderspach, S. Stein, S. Groshen, C. Morrow (1997)
Pelvic examination, tumor marker level, and gray‐scale and Doppler sonography in the prediction of pelvic cancerInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 58
Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic parameters to differentiate between benign versus malignant ovarian masses using contrast‐enhanced transvaginal sonography (TVS). Methods. Thirty‐three consecutive patients with 36 morphologically abnormal ovarian masses (solid or cystic with papillary excrescences, focally thickened walls, or irregular solid areas) smaller than 10 cm received a microbubble contrast agent intravenously while undergoing pulse inversion harmonic TVS. The following parameters were assessed: presence of contrast enhancement, time to peak enhancement, peak contrast enhancement, half wash‐out time, and area under the enhancement curve (AUC). Tumor histologic analysis was used to distinguish benign from malignant ovarian tumors. Results. Twenty‐six benign masses and 10 malignancies were studied. Of all examined criteria, an AUC of greater than 787 seconds−1 was the most accurate diagnostic criterion for ovarian cancer, with 100.0% sensitivity and 96.2% specificity. Additionally, peak contrast enhancement of greater than 17.2 dB (90.0% sensitivity and 98.3% specificity) and half wash‐out time of greater than 41.0 seconds (100.0% sensitivity and 92.3% specificity) proved to be useful. Conclusions. Our data suggest that the AUC, peak enhancement, and half wash‐out time had the greatest diagnostic accuracy for contrast‐enhanced TVS in differentiation between benign and malignant ovarian masses.
Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine – Wiley
Published: Oct 1, 2009
Keywords: ; ;
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.