{"title":"卵巢附件报告数据系统（O-RADS）与IOTA简单规则和ADNEX模型对附件肿块分类诊断性能的比较：一项头对头meta分析。","authors":"Gisela Almeida, Mar Bort, Juan Luis Alcázar","doi":"10.1002/jcu.24048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of O-RADS (Ovarian Reporting and Data System) and IOTA (international Ovarian Tumor Analysis group) simple rules (SR) and ADNEX (Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adnexa) model for discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses using meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of studies comparing O-RADS with SR and/or ADNEX in the same set of patients with an adnexal mass was performed in Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from January 2020 to September 2023. Quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Quantitative meta-analysis was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine articles comprising 3924 women (3979 adnexal masses) were ultimately included after exclusions. Three studies compared O-RADS versus SR, three studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX, and three studies compared all three methods. The risk of bias was high for patient selection in QUADAS-2 in all studies. Six studies compared O-RADS versus SR; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS and IOTA SR were 94.0% and 77.0%, and 91.0% and 87.0%, respectively. p = 0.2204). Six studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS classification system and ADNEX were 95.0% and 79.0%, and 91.0% and 88.0%, respectively. p = 0.2307).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>O-RADS classification has a similar diagnostic performance to IOTA SR and ADNEX for discriminating benign and malignant adnexal masses.</p>","PeriodicalId":15386,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Ovarian Adnexal Reporting Data System (O-RADS) With IOTA Simple Rules and ADNEX Model for Classifying Adnexal Masses: A Head-To-Head Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Gisela Almeida, Mar Bort, Juan Luis Alcázar\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jcu.24048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of O-RADS (Ovarian Reporting and Data System) and IOTA (international Ovarian Tumor Analysis group) simple rules (SR) and ADNEX (Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adnexa) model for discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses using meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of studies comparing O-RADS with SR and/or ADNEX in the same set of patients with an adnexal mass was performed in Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from January 2020 to September 2023. Quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Quantitative meta-analysis was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine articles comprising 3924 women (3979 adnexal masses) were ultimately included after exclusions. Three studies compared O-RADS versus SR, three studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX, and three studies compared all three methods. The risk of bias was high for patient selection in QUADAS-2 in all studies. Six studies compared O-RADS versus SR; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS and IOTA SR were 94.0% and 77.0%, and 91.0% and 87.0%, respectively. p = 0.2204). Six studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS classification system and ADNEX were 95.0% and 79.0%, and 91.0% and 88.0%, respectively. p = 0.2307).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>O-RADS classification has a similar diagnostic performance to IOTA SR and ADNEX for discriminating benign and malignant adnexal masses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15386,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.24048\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ACOUSTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.24048","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的：采用meta分析方法比较O-RADS （Ovarian Reporting and Data System）和IOTA （international Ovarian Tumor Analysis group）简单规则（SR）和ADNEX （Assessment of Different NEoplasias in附件）模型对附件良恶性肿块的诊断准确性。方法：系统检索2020年1月至2023年9月在Medline、Web of Science和Scopus数据库中比较O-RADS与SR和/或ADNEX在同一组附件肿块患者中的研究。使用QUADAS-2工具评估质量。进行定量荟萃分析。结果：排除后最终纳入9篇文章3924例女性（3979例附件肿块）。3项研究比较了O-RADS与SR， 3项研究比较了O-RADS与ADNEX， 3项研究比较了所有三种方法。在所有研究中，QUADAS-2患者选择的偏倚风险都很高。6项研究比较了O-RADS和SR；O-RADS和IOTA SR的综合敏感性和特异性分别为94.0%和77.0%，91.0%和87.0%。p = 0.2204)。6项研究比较了O-RADS和ADNEX；O-RADS分类系统与ADNEX的综合敏感性和特异性分别为95.0%和79.0%，91.0%和88.0%。p = 0.2307)。结论：O-RADS分级与IOTA SR、ADNEX鉴别附件良恶性肿块具有相似的诊断价值。
Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Ovarian Adnexal Reporting Data System (O-RADS) With IOTA Simple Rules and ADNEX Model for Classifying Adnexal Masses: A Head-To-Head Meta-Analysis.
Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of O-RADS (Ovarian Reporting and Data System) and IOTA (international Ovarian Tumor Analysis group) simple rules (SR) and ADNEX (Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adnexa) model for discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses using meta-analysis.
Methods: A systematic search of studies comparing O-RADS with SR and/or ADNEX in the same set of patients with an adnexal mass was performed in Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from January 2020 to September 2023. Quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Quantitative meta-analysis was performed.
Results: Nine articles comprising 3924 women (3979 adnexal masses) were ultimately included after exclusions. Three studies compared O-RADS versus SR, three studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX, and three studies compared all three methods. The risk of bias was high for patient selection in QUADAS-2 in all studies. Six studies compared O-RADS versus SR; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS and IOTA SR were 94.0% and 77.0%, and 91.0% and 87.0%, respectively. p = 0.2204). Six studies compared O-RADS versus ADNEX; no significant differences were found (pooled sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS classification system and ADNEX were 95.0% and 79.0%, and 91.0% and 88.0%, respectively. p = 0.2307).
Conclusion: O-RADS classification has a similar diagnostic performance to IOTA SR and ADNEX for discriminating benign and malignant adnexal masses.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Clinical Ultrasound (JCU) is an international journal dedicated to the worldwide dissemination of scientific information on diagnostic and therapeutic applications of medical sonography.
The scope of the journal includes--but is not limited to--the following areas: sonography of the gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary tract, vascular system, nervous system, head and neck, chest, breast, musculoskeletal system, and other superficial structures; Doppler applications; obstetric and pediatric applications; and interventional sonography. Studies comparing sonography with other imaging modalities are encouraged, as are studies evaluating the economic impact of sonography. Also within the journal''s scope are innovations and improvements in instrumentation and examination techniques and the use of contrast agents.
JCU publishes original research articles, case reports, pictorial essays, technical notes, and letters to the editor. The journal is also dedicated to being an educational resource for its readers, through the publication of review articles and various scientific contributions from members of the editorial board and other world-renowned experts in sonography.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
