用于区分良性和恶性复杂附件肿块的 IOTA 模型的诊断可租性

IF 0.1 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
A. Rodríguez Pérez , A. Caruso , M. Pantoja Garrido , I. Rodríguez Jiménez , A. Polo Velasco , J.J. Fernández Alba
{"title":"用于区分良性和恶性复杂附件肿块的 IOTA 模型的诊断可租性","authors":"A. Rodríguez Pérez ,&nbsp;A. Caruso ,&nbsp;M. Pantoja Garrido ,&nbsp;I. Rodríguez Jiménez ,&nbsp;A. Polo Velasco ,&nbsp;J.J. Fernández Alba","doi":"10.1016/j.gine.2024.101000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the <em>International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA)</em> Logistic Regression Model 1, 2 (LR1, LR2) ADNEX model and IOTA Simple Rules, in the pre-surgical evaluation of ovarian tumors classified as complex adnexal masses.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This is a cross-sectional observational study of diagnostic accuracy. We will select patients, who undergo surgical intervention due to adnexal mass with indeterminate, intermediate or high suspicion of malignancy (GI-RADS 4–5), as assessed by an expert ultrasound operator. We analyzed and compared the diagnostic performance and predictive capacity of the different models in the studied population, and also we analyzed each model by creating subgroups based on menopausal status.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>One hundred thirty five malignant masses (45%), one hundred forty benign (46.7%) and twenty five border line (8.3%) were included.</div><div>LR1 and LR2 models, and ADNEX were applicable to all lesions; however, in 72 lesions (24%), the simple rules were inconclusive.</div><div>We observed better performance for LR1 and simple rules, based on the following results: Sensitivity: LR1 91%. Specificity: simple rules 86%. PPV: simple rules 79%. NPV: LR1 88%.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study suggests that the subgroup of patients with complex adnexal masses, the IOTA risk stratification through LR1 shows higher sensitivity for risk stratification of malignancy, while simple rules has the highest specificity and diagnostic accuracy. However, it is inconclusive in one out of every four adnexal masses. Additionally, LR1–LR2 and ADNEX do not show significant differences in diagnostic accuracy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":41294,"journal":{"name":"Clinica e Investigacion en Ginecologia y Obstetricia","volume":"52 1","pages":"Article 101000"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic rentability of IOTA models for differentiating between benign and malignant complex adnexal masses\",\"authors\":\"A. Rodríguez Pérez ,&nbsp;A. Caruso ,&nbsp;M. Pantoja Garrido ,&nbsp;I. Rodríguez Jiménez ,&nbsp;A. Polo Velasco ,&nbsp;J.J. Fernández Alba\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.gine.2024.101000\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the <em>International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA)</em> Logistic Regression Model 1, 2 (LR1, LR2) ADNEX model and IOTA Simple Rules, in the pre-surgical evaluation of ovarian tumors classified as complex adnexal masses.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This is a cross-sectional observational study of diagnostic accuracy. We will select patients, who undergo surgical intervention due to adnexal mass with indeterminate, intermediate or high suspicion of malignancy (GI-RADS 4–5), as assessed by an expert ultrasound operator. We analyzed and compared the diagnostic performance and predictive capacity of the different models in the studied population, and also we analyzed each model by creating subgroups based on menopausal status.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>One hundred thirty five malignant masses (45%), one hundred forty benign (46.7%) and twenty five border line (8.3%) were included.</div><div>LR1 and LR2 models, and ADNEX were applicable to all lesions; however, in 72 lesions (24%), the simple rules were inconclusive.</div><div>We observed better performance for LR1 and simple rules, based on the following results: Sensitivity: LR1 91%. Specificity: simple rules 86%. PPV: simple rules 79%. NPV: LR1 88%.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study suggests that the subgroup of patients with complex adnexal masses, the IOTA risk stratification through LR1 shows higher sensitivity for risk stratification of malignancy, while simple rules has the highest specificity and diagnostic accuracy. However, it is inconclusive in one out of every four adnexal masses. Additionally, LR1–LR2 and ADNEX do not show significant differences in diagnostic accuracy.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":41294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinica e Investigacion en Ginecologia y Obstetricia\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 101000\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinica e Investigacion en Ginecologia y Obstetricia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210573X24000637\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinica e Investigacion en Ginecologia y Obstetricia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210573X24000637","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 评价国际卵巢肿瘤分析(IOTA)逻辑回归模型 1、2(LR1、LR2)ADNEX 模型和 IOTA 简单规则在手术前评估归类为复杂附件肿块的卵巢肿瘤时的诊断准确性。我们将选择因附件肿块而接受手术治疗的患者,由超声波操作专家评估其恶性程度为不确定、中度或高度怀疑(GI-RADS 4-5)。我们分析并比较了不同模型在研究人群中的诊断性能和预测能力,还根据绝经状态创建了亚组,对每个模型进行了分析。LR1和LR2模型以及ADNEX适用于所有病变;然而,在72个病变(24%)中,简单规则无法得出结论:灵敏度灵敏度:LR1 91%。特异性:简单规则为 86%。PPV:简单规则 79%。结论我们的研究表明,在复杂附件肿块患者亚组中,通过 LR1 进行 IOTA 风险分层对恶性肿瘤风险分层的敏感性更高,而简单规则的特异性和诊断准确性最高。然而,每四个附件肿块中就有一个是不确定的。此外,LR1-LR2 和 ADNEX 在诊断准确性上也没有明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic rentability of IOTA models for differentiating between benign and malignant complex adnexal masses

Purpose

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Logistic Regression Model 1, 2 (LR1, LR2) ADNEX model and IOTA Simple Rules, in the pre-surgical evaluation of ovarian tumors classified as complex adnexal masses.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional observational study of diagnostic accuracy. We will select patients, who undergo surgical intervention due to adnexal mass with indeterminate, intermediate or high suspicion of malignancy (GI-RADS 4–5), as assessed by an expert ultrasound operator. We analyzed and compared the diagnostic performance and predictive capacity of the different models in the studied population, and also we analyzed each model by creating subgroups based on menopausal status.

Results

One hundred thirty five malignant masses (45%), one hundred forty benign (46.7%) and twenty five border line (8.3%) were included.
LR1 and LR2 models, and ADNEX were applicable to all lesions; however, in 72 lesions (24%), the simple rules were inconclusive.
We observed better performance for LR1 and simple rules, based on the following results: Sensitivity: LR1 91%. Specificity: simple rules 86%. PPV: simple rules 79%. NPV: LR1 88%.

Conclusions

Our study suggests that the subgroup of patients with complex adnexal masses, the IOTA risk stratification through LR1 shows higher sensitivity for risk stratification of malignancy, while simple rules has the highest specificity and diagnostic accuracy. However, it is inconclusive in one out of every four adnexal masses. Additionally, LR1–LR2 and ADNEX do not show significant differences in diagnostic accuracy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: Una excelente publicación para mantenerse al día en los temas de máximo interés de la ginecología de vanguardia. Resulta idónea tanto para el especialista en ginecología, como en obstetricia o en pediatría, y está presente en los más prestigiosos índices de referencia en medicina.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信