Adnexal masses during pregnancy: diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis

Adnexal masses are identified in pregnant patients at a rate of 2 to 20 in 1000, approximately 2 to 20 times more frequently than in the age-matched general population. The most common types of adnexal masses in pregnancy requiring surgical management are dermoid cysts (32%), endometriomas (15%), functional cysts (12%), serous cystadenomas (11%), and mucinous cystadenomas (8%). Approximately 2% of adnexal masses in pregnancy are malignant. Although most adnexal masses in pregnancy can be safely observed and approximately 70% spontaneously resolve, a minority of cases warrant surgical intervention because of symptoms, risk of torsion, or suspicion of malignancy. Ultrasound is the mainstay of evaluation of adnexal masses in pregnancy because of accuracy, safety, and availability. Several ultrasound mass scoring systems, including the Sassone, Lerner, International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules, and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa scoring systems have been validated specifically in pregnant populations. Decisions regarding expectant vs surgical management of adnexal masses in pregnancy must balance the risks of torsion or malignancy with the likelihood of spontaneous resolution and the risks of surgery. Laparoscopic surgery is preferred over open surgery when possible because of consistently demonstrated shorter hospital length of stay and less postoperative pain and some data demonstrating shorter operative time, lower blood loss, and lower risks of fetal loss, preterm birth, and low birthweight. The best practices for laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy include left lateral decubitus positioning after the first trimester of pregnancy, port placement with respect to uterine size and pathology location, insufflation pressure of less than 12 to 15 mm Hg, intraoperative maternal capnography, pre- and postoperative fetal heart rate and contraction monitoring, and appropriate mechanical and chemical thromboprophylaxes. Although planning surgery for the second trimester of pregnancy generally affords time for mass resolution while optimizing visualization with regards to uterine size and pathology location, necessary surgery should not be delayed because of gestational age. When performed at a facility with appropriate obstetrical, anesthetic, and neonatal support, adnexal surgery in pregnancy generally results in excellent outcomes for pregnant patients and fetuses.

Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents Can Accurately Classify Benign Ovarian Tumors Using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Rules

OBJECTIVES

Recognition of benign versus malignant tumors is essential in gynecologic ultrasound (US). The International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) rules have been proposed as part of resident US training. The objective of this study was to examine whether they could be accurately used by obstetrics and gynecology residents in Rwanda.

METHODS

Patients undergoing explorative laparotomy for adnexal masses at the University Teaching Hospital of Kigali were included. Before the study, a didactic lecture on the IOTA rules for classifying adnexal masses was performed. Preoperative transabdominal US examinations were performed by residents at different levels of training, who were blinded to the results of prior US examinations. The IOTA classification was compared to the final pathologic diagnosis.

RESULTS

There were 72 patients who underwent 116 US examinations. Only 15.5% of US examinations were considered inconclusive. First-year residents (12) correctly diagnosed 18 of 20 masses (90%) as benign and 4 of 4 as malignant. Second-year residents (9) classified 29 of 29 masses correctly. Third-year residents (10) accurately identified 21 of 22 (95.5%) as benign and 5 of 5 as malignant. Fourth-year residents (13) accurately identified 11 of 12 (91.7%) as benign and 6 of 6 as malignant. Therefore, 74 of 78 tumors (94.9%) considered benign by IOTA rules were confirmed by histologic results. Similarly, all 20 tumors classified as malignant were confirmed. Overall, the sensitivities to diagnose benign and malignant tumors by the IOTA rules were 83.3% and 100%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 94.9%. There were no significant differences noted between residency years.

CONCLUSIONS

All levels of Rwandan obstetrics and gynecology residents were able to use the IOTA rules to accurately distinguish benign from malignant tumors.

Comparison of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules to Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Guidelines for Detection of Malignancy in Adnexal Cysts

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) simple rules and the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU) guidelines for detecting ovarian malignancy in a general population of women presenting to radiology departments with adnexal cystic lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A retrospective multicenter study of ultrasound-detected adnexal cystic lesions with appropriate follow-up was conducted. Lesions were classified into benign, indeterminate, or malignant categories according to criteria based on the IOTA simple rules and the SRU guidelines. The prevalence of nonneoplastic cysts, neoplasms, and malignant tumors was calculated. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated, and ROC analysis for the diagnosis of malignancy was performed. RESULTS. A total of 697 women with 764 cystic lesions were included; 85.2% (651/764) of the lesions were nonneoplastic, 12.2% (93/764) were benign neoplasms, and 2.6% (20/764) were malignant neoplasms. Nearly all malignancies were classified into indeterminate and malignant categories. The prevalence of malignancy in the indeterminate category was 4.8% (7/145) (SRU) to 10.7% (7/65) (IOTA) and in the malignant category was 18.1% (13/72) (SRU) to 34.3% (12/35) (IOTA). Only one malignancy was misclassified as benign by the IOTA simple rules. The sensitivity of the IOTA simple rules for malignancy was 90.0%; specificity, 96.5%; PPV, 29.0%; NPV, 99.8%; and accuracy, 96.4%. The corresponding values for the SRU guidelines were 100%, 89.6%, 14.9%, 100%, and 89.8%. In ROC analysis, the IOTA simple rules were slightly more accurate than the SRU guidelines (AUC, 0.9805 versus 0.9713; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION. Both imaging characterization methods were sensitive for identifying ovarian malignancies, but the PPV was low among women presenting to radiology departments, and the indeterminate classification harbored one-third of the total malignancies. Exploration of varied clinical settings and inclusion of secondary tests may help to refine these systems.

Methods of Assessing Ovarian Masses: International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Approach

There are many diagnostic methods to assist clinicians in assessing adnexal masses on ultrasound. After suggesting a standardized terminology and measurement technique to evaluate adnexal masses, the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group has developed different strategies such as the Simple Rules and Assessment of Different Neoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model, which have been shown to outperform other available methods. Besides differentiating between benign neoplasms and malignancies, the ADNEX model can also give the predicted risk for different subtypes of malignant adnexal masses, which is clinically very relevant for guiding patient management.

Predicting the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses based on the Simple Rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group

BACKGROUND

Accurate methods to preoperatively characterize adnexal tumors are pivotal for optimal patient management. A recent metaanalysis concluded that the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis algorithms such as the Simple Rules are the best approaches to preoperatively classify adnexal masses as benign or malignant.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to develop and validate a model to predict the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses using the ultrasound features in the Simple Rules.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an international cross-sectional cohort study involving 22 oncology centers, referral centers for ultrasonography, and general hospitals. We included consecutive patients with an adnexal tumor who underwent a standardized transvaginal ultrasound examination and were selected for surgery. Data on 5020 patients were recorded in 3 phases from 2002 through 2012. The 5 Simple Rules features indicative of a benign tumor (B-features) and the 5 features indicative of malignancy (M-features) are based on the presence of ascites, tumor morphology, and degree of vascularity at ultrasonography. Gold standard was the histopathologic diagnosis of the adnexal mass (pathologist blinded to ultrasound findings). Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the risk of malignancy based on the 10 ultrasound features and type of center. The diagnostic performance was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and calibration curves.

RESULTS

Data on 4848 patients were analyzed. The malignancy rate was 43% (1402/3263) in oncology centers and 17% (263/1585) in other centers. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve on validation data was very similar in oncology centers (0.917; 95% confidence interval, 0.901-0.931) and other centers (0.916; 95% confidence interval, 0.873-0.945). Risk estimates showed good calibration. In all, 23% of patients in the validation data set had a very low estimated risk (<1%) and 48% had a high estimated risk (≥30%). For the 1% risk cutoff, sensitivity was 99.7%, specificity 33.7%, LR+ 1.5, LR- 0.010, PPV 44.8%, and NPV 98.9%. For the 30% risk cutoff, sensitivity was 89.0%, specificity 84.7%, LR+ 5.8, LR- 0.13, PPV 75.4%, and NPV 93.9%.

CONCLUSION

Quantification of the risk of malignancy based on the Simple Rules has good diagnostic performance both in oncology centers and other centers. A simple classification based on these risk estimates may form the basis of a clinical management system. Patients with a high risk may benefit from surgery by a gynecological oncologist, while patients with a lower risk may be managed locally.