卵巢附件报告和数据系统结合超声造影的诊断效能:对123例附件肿块的分析

Diagnostic efficacy of Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound: analysis of 123 adnexal masses

  • 摘要: 目的 评估卵巢附件报告和数据系统超声(O-RADS)结合超声造影(CEUS)对卵巢附件恶性肿块的诊断效能及观察者之间的一致性。方法 收集2021年7月至2023年12月在香港大学深圳医院和中山大学附属第七医院检查发现卵巢附件肿块的123例患者(123个肿块)临床和病理资料,所有肿块均在术前进行超声造影检查,以组织病理结果为金标准对每个肿块依据卵巢附件报告和数据系统(O-RADS)进行分类,同时记录每个肿块的超声造影(CEUS)特征,根据不同特征的赋分累积计算总分,按照卵巢附件报告和数据系统结合超声造影(O-RADS+CEUS)重新将肿块进行分类。Kappa(κ)统计量用于评估观察者之间的一致性。结果 123例卵巢附件肿块中,良性94例、恶性29例。O-RADS 5类、O-RADS 4类、O-RADS 3类病变的恶性率分别为81.25%、20.83%和2.86%,O-RADS+CEUS 5类、O-RADS+CEUS 4类、O-RADS+CEUS 3类、O-RADS+CEUS 2类病变的恶性率分别为75%、21.74%、0%和0%。两者受试者工作特性曲线下面积分别 0.791(95% CI为0.891~0.976)和0.934(95% CI为0.697~0.886),O-RADS+CEUS的诊断性能要高于O-RADS(P < 0.001)。以分类≥ O-RADS 4类为恶性肿瘤截断值,O-RADS和O-RDS+CEUS的灵敏度和特异度分别为0.966(95% CI为0.822~0.999)和0.362 (95% CI为0.265~0.467)、1.000 (95% CI为0.881~1.000)和0.723 (95% CI为0.622~0.811)。两名不同年资超声医师之间的观察者一致性好(κ为0.668~0.840)。结论 与O-RADS相比,O-RADS+CEUS提高了卵巢附件恶性病变的诊断特异度。不同年资的超声医师对O-RADS分类及超声造影指标的观察具有较好的一致性。

     

    Abstract: Objective To assess the diagnostic performance and inter-observer agreement of the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System ultrasound (O-RADS) combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Methods Clinicopathological data of 123 adnexal lesions from 123 patients admitted to the University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital and the Seventh Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from July 2021 to December 2023 were collected. Each lesion was subject to CEUS before surgery. Each lesion was assigned to an O-RADS US category with histopathological results as the gold standard. The CEUS features of each lesion were recorded and used to calculate the total CEUS scores. Lesions were then re-rated according to O-RADS plus CEUS scores. Kappa (κ) statistics were applied to assess inter-observer agreement between a less experienced and an expert radiologist. Results Of the 123 adnexal lesions, 94 were benign and 29 were malignant. The malignancy rates of O-RADS 5, O-RADS 4 and O-RADS 3 lesions were 81.25%, 20.83% and 2.86%, respectively. The malignancy rates of O-RADS+CEUS 5, O-RADS+CEUS 4, O-RADS+CEUS 3 and O-RADS+CEUS 2 lesions were 75%, 21.74%, 0% and 0%, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of two observers were 0.791 (95% CI 0.891-0.976) and 0.934 (95% CI 0.697-0.886), respectively. The diagnostic performance of O-RADS plus CEUS was higher than that of O-RADS alone (P = 0.0004). Taking ≥ O-RADS 4 as the cut-off value for malignant lesions, the sensitivity and specificity of O-RADS and O-RADS+CEUS were 0.966 (95% CI, 0.822-0.999) and 0.362 (95% CI 0.265-0.467), 1.000 (95% CI 0.881-1.000) and 0.723 (95% CI 0.622-0.811), respectively. The inter-observer agreement between a less experienced and an expert radiologist of O-RADS and CEUS features were good or very good (κ 0.668-0.840). Conclusions Compared with O-RADS, O-RADS plus CEUS shows better diagnostic specificity for malignant adnexal lesions. The inter-observer agreement between a less experienced and an expert radiologist of O-RADS and CEUS features is good.

     

/

返回文章
返回