-
Original Article
-
Korean J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;55(9):636-643. Published online September 17, 2012.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5468/KJOG.2012.55.9.636
- Four risk of malignancy indices in evaluation of pelvic masses.
-
Jung Woo Park, Jee Hyun Park, Eun Seop Song, Byoung Ick Lee, Jeong Hoon Lee, Ki Won Kim, Kyoung Mi Kim, Min Jae Jung, Nae Ri Yun, Sung Ook Hwang
-
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea. sohwang@inha.ac.kr
- Abstract
- OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of the four malignancy risk indices for discrimination of a benign mass from a malignant pelvic mass. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 547 women admitted to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Inha University College of Medicine, between January, 2007, and December, 2010, for surgical exploration of a pelvic mass. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy of four risk of malignancy indices (RMIs: RMI 1, RMI 2, RMI 3, and RMI 4) were obtained for diagnosis of a malignant pelvic mass. RESULTS: Results of receiver operating characteristic analysis of RMI 1-4, CA-125 serum levels, ultrasound score, menopausal status, and tumor size showed values of the area under the curve of 0.9233, 0.9151, 0.9132, 0.9263, 0.8472, 0.9007, 5870, and 0.7714, respectively. The four RMIs showed statistical significance with menopausal status (P=0.001) and tumor size (P=0.03), but not with CA-125 and ultrasound score (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Four RMIs were found to be statistically significant diagnostic criteria, compared with menopausal status and tumor size, which can discriminate between benign and malignant pelvic masses.
Keywords :Risk of malignancy index;Pelvic mass;Ovarian cancer
