...
首页> 外文期刊>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology >A scoring system to differentiate malignant from benign masses in specific ultrasound-based subgroups of adnexal tumors.
【24h】

A scoring system to differentiate malignant from benign masses in specific ultrasound-based subgroups of adnexal tumors.

机译:一个评分系统,用于区分基于附件超声的特定超声亚组中的恶性肿块与良性肿块。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if the prediction of malignant adnexal masses can be improved by considering different ultrasound-based subgroups of tumors and constructing a scoring system for each subgroup instead of using a risk estimation model applicable to all tumors. METHODS: We used a multicenter database of 1573 patients with at least one persistent adnexal mass. The masses were categorized into four subgroups based on their ultrasound appearance: (1) unilocular cyst; (2) multilocular cyst; (3) presence of a solid component but no papillation; and (4) presence of papillation. For each of the four subgroups a scoring system to predict malignancy was developed in a development set consisting of 754 patients in total (respective numbers of patients: (1) 228; (2) 143; (3) 183; and (4) 200). The subgroup scoring system was then tested in 312 patients and prospectively validated in 507 patients. The sensitivity and specificity, with regard to the prediction of malignancy, of the scoring system were compared with that of the subjective evaluation of ultrasound images by an experienced examiner (pattern recognition) and with that of a published logistic regression (LR) model for the calculation of risk of malignancy in adnexal masses. The gold standard was the pathological classification of the mass as benign or malignant (borderline, primary invasive, or metastatic). RESULTS: In the prospective validation set, the sensitivity of pattern recognition, the LR model and the subgroup scoring system was 90% (129/143), 95% (136/143) and 88% (126/143), respectively, and the specificity was 93% (338/364), 74% (270/364) and 90% (329/364), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the hands of experienced ultrasound examiners, the subgroup scoring system for diagnosing malignancy has a performance that is similar to that of pattern recognition, the latter method being the best diagnostic method currently available. The scoring system is less sensitive but more specific than the LR model.
机译:目的:探讨是否可以通过考虑不同的基于超声的肿瘤亚组并为每个亚组构建评分系统,而不是使用适用于所有肿瘤的风险评估模型来改善对恶性附件包块的预测。方法:我们使用了一个多中心数据库,该数据库包含1573名至少有一个持续性附件包块的患者。根据肿块的超声表现将其分为四个亚组:(1)单眼囊肿; (2)多房囊肿; (3)存在固体成分,但无乳头状增生; (4)存在乳头状。对于这四个亚组中的每一个,在总共由754名患者组成的开发集中开发了一种预测恶性程度的评分系统(患者人数分别为(1)228;(2)143;(3)183;和(4)200) )。然后对312位患者进行了亚组评分系统的测试,并在507位患者中进行了前瞻性验证。将评分系统在恶性预测方面的敏感性和特异性与经验丰富的检查员对超声图像的主观评估(模式识别)和已发表的逻辑回归(LR)模型的敏感性和特异性进行比较。计算附件包块的恶性风险。金标准是肿块的病理分类为良性或恶性(边界,原发性或转移性)。结果:在前瞻性验证集中,模式识别,LR模型和亚组评分系统的敏感性分别为90%(129/143),95%(136/143)和88%(126/143),以及特异性分别为93%(338/364),74%(270/364)和90%(329/364)。结论:在经验丰富的超声检查人员的手中,用于诊断恶性肿瘤的亚组评分系统的性能与模式识别相似,后者是目前可用的最佳诊断方法。评分系统不如LR模型敏感,但更具针对性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号