Radiology, Vol 208, 103-110, Copyright © 1998 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Benign and malignant ovarian masses: selection of the most discriminating gray-scale and Doppler sonographic features

DL Brown, PM Doubilet, FH Miller, MC Frates, FC Laing, DN DiSalvo, CB Benson and MH Lerner
Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

PURPOSE: To determine the gray-scale and Doppler sonographic features that best enable discrimination between malignant and benign ovarian masses and develop a scoring system for accurate diagnosis with these features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gray-scale and Doppler sonographic features of 211 adnexal masses were correlated with the final diagnosis; the most discriminating features for malignancy were selected with stepwise logistic regression. RESULTS: Twenty-eight masses were malignant and 183 benign. All masses with a markedly hyperechoic solid component or no solid component were benign. For masses with a nonhyperechoic solid component, additional features that allowed statistically significant discrimination of benignity from malignancy were, in decreasing order of importance, (a) location of flow at conventional color Doppler imaging, (b) amount of free intraperitoneal fluid, and (c) presence and thickness of septations. A scoring formula that made use of values based on the logistic regression equation had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.98 +/- 0.01. The cutoff score with the highest accuracy had a sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 93%. CONCLUSION: A solid component is the most statistically significant predictor of a malignant ovarian mass. A multiparameter scoring system that uses three gray-scale and one Doppler feature, developed by means of stepwise logistic regression, has high sensitivity and specificity for predicting malignancy.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				I. Thomassin-Naggara, M. Bazot, E. Darai, P. Callard, J. Thomassin, and C. A. Cuenod Epithelial Ovarian Tumors: Value of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging and Correlation with Tumor Angiogenesis Radiology, July 1, 2008; 248(1): 148 - 159. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Levine, E. Asch, T. S. Mehta, J. Broder, C. O'Donnell, and J. L. Hecht Assessment of Factors That Affect the Quality of Performance and Interpretation of Sonography of Adnexal Masses J. Ultrasound Med., May 1, 2008; 27(5): 721 - 728. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. N. Viswanathan, B. M. Buttin, and A. M. Kennedy Oncodiagnosis Panel: 2006: Ovarian, Cervical, and Endometrial Cancer RadioGraphics, January 1, 2008; 28(1): 289 - 307. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. I. Lee Radiological reasoning: imaging characterization of bilateral adnexal masses. Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2006; 187(3 Suppl): S460 - S466. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M V Pakkal and M Balogun Imaging of ovarian cancer Imaging, August 1, 2006; 18(1): 20 - 27. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W.-C. Chang, M. D. Meux, B. M. Yeh, A. Qayyum, B. N. Joe, L.-m. Chen, and F. V. Coakley CT and MRI of Adnexal Masses in Patients with Primary Nonovarian Malignancy. Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2006; 186(4): 1039 - 1045. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Kinkel, Y. Lu, A. Mehdizade, M.-F. Pelte, and H. Hricak Indeterminate Ovarian Mass at US: Incremental Value of Second Imaging Test for Characterization--Meta-Analysis and Bayesian Analysis Radiology, July 1, 2005; 236(1): 85 - 94. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C.D. de Kroon, H.A.G.M. van der Sandt, J.C. van Houwelingen, and F.W. Jansen Sonographic assessment of non-malignant ovarian cysts: does sonohistology exist? Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2004; 19(9): 2138 - 2143. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. Woodward, K. Hosseinzadeh, and J. S. Saenger From the Archives of the AFIP: Radiologic Staging of Ovarian Carcinoma with Pathologic Correlation RadioGraphics, January 1, 2004; 24(1): 225 - 246. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. L. Brown, K. H. Zou, C. M. C. Tempany, M. C. Frates, S. G. Silverman, B. J. McNeil, and A. B. Kurtz Primary versus Secondary Ovarian Malignancy: Imaging Findings of Adnexal Masses in the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group Study Radiology, April 1, 2001; 219(1): 213 - 218. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				K. Kinkel, H. Hricak, Y. Lu, K. Tsuda, and R. A. Filly US Characterization of Ovarian Masses: A Meta-Analysis Radiology, December 1, 2000; 217(3): 803 - 811. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				Y.-Y. Jeong, E. K. Outwater, and H. K. Kang Imaging Evaluation of Ovarian Masses RadioGraphics, September 1, 2000; 20(5): 1445 - 1470. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. E. Hann, D. M. Lui, W. Shi, A. M. Bach, D.-L. Selland, and M. Castiel Adnexal Masses in Women with Breast Cancer: US Findings with Clinical and Histopathologic Correlation Radiology, July 1, 2000; 216(1): 242 - 247. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				H. Hricak, M. Chen, F. V. Coakley, K. Kinkel, K. K. Yu, G. Sica, P. Bacchetti, and C. B. Powell Complex Adnexal Masses: Detection and Characterization with MR Imaging-Multivariate Analysis1 Radiology, January 1, 2000; 214(1): 39 - 46. [Abstract] [Full Text]