Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative characterization of ovarian neoplasms: a retrospective study with histopathological correlation

Meghna Nair; Akkamahadevi Hiremath; Aishwarya Shukla

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20263445

Authors

Meghna Nair Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sri Madhusudhan Sai Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Chikkabalapur, Karnataka, India
Akkamahadevi Hiremath Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sri Madhusudhan Sai Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Chikkabalapur, Karnataka, India
Aishwarya Shukla Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sri Madhusudhan Sai Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Chikkabalapur, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20263445

Keywords:

Magnetic resonance imaging, Histopathology, Ovarian neoplasms, O-RADS MRI, Adnexal mass, Diagnostic accuracy

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the preoperative characterization of ovarian neoplasms using histopathological examination (HPE) as the reference standard.

Methods: This retrospective observational study included 105 women with indeterminate or suspicious adnexal masses who underwent preoperative MRI followed by surgical management and histopathological examination at a tertiary care centre. MRI findings were categorized as benign or borderline/malignant based on morphological and tissue-specific imaging characteristics. Histopathological examination served as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), overall diagnostic accuracy, and Cohen's kappa coefficient were calculated.

Results: Histopathological examination identified 73 (69.5%) benign and 32 (30.5%) borderline/malignant ovarian neoplasms. MRI correctly classified all 73 benign lesions and 27 of the 32 borderline/malignant lesions, while five borderline/malignant lesions were incorrectly classified as benign. MRI demonstrated a sensitivity of 84.4%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 93.6%, and overall diagnostic accuracy of 95.2%. Agreement between MRI and histopathological classification was excellent (κ=0.88).

Conclusion: MRI demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy and excellent agreement with histopathological examination in differentiating benign from borderline/malignant ovarian neoplasms. Its high specificity supports its role as a valuable problem-solving modality in the preoperative characterization of ovarian masses. However, histopathological examination remains essential for definitive diagnosis.

References

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-49.

Sohaib SAA, Reznek RH. MR imaging in ovarian cancer. Cancer Imaging. 2007;7:119-29.

Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH, Collins WP, Verrelst H, Vergote I. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16(5):500-5.

Kaijser J, Bourne T, Valentin L, Sayasneh A, Van Holsbeke C, Vergote I, et al. Improving strategies for diagnosing ovarian cancer: a summary of the international ovarian tumor analysis (IOTA) studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41(1):9-20.

Forstner R, Thomassin-Naggara I, Cunha TM, Kinkel K, Masselli G, Kubik-Huch RA, et al. ESUR recommendations for MR imaging of the sonographically indeterminate adnexal mass: an update. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(6):2248-57.

Thomassin-Naggara I, Cuenod CA, Darai E, Marsault C, Bazot M. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of ovarian neoplasms: current status and future perspectives. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2008;16(4):661-72.

Sohaib SA, Sahdev A, Van Trappen P, Jacobs IJ, Reznek RH. Characterization of adnexal mass lesions on MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180(5):1297-304.

Thomassin-Naggara I, Poncelet E, Jalaguier-Coudray A, Guerra A, Fournier LS, Stojanovic S, et al. Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Data System Magnetic Resonance Imaging (O-RADS MRI) score for risk stratification of sonographically indeterminate adnexal masses. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(1):1919896.

Wang WH, Zheng CB, Gao JN, Ren SS, Nie GY, Li ZQ. Systematic review and meta-analysis of imaging differential diagnosis of benign and malignant ovarian tumors. Gland Surg. 2022;11(2):330-40.

Rizzo S, Cozzi A, Dolciami M, Del Grande F, Scarano AL, Papadia A, et al. O-RADS MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic performance and category-wise malignancy rates. Radiology. 2023;307(1):220795.

Avesani G, et al. ESR Essentials: characterisation and staging of adnexal masses with MRI and CT—practice recommendations by ESUR. Eur Radiol. 2024;34(12):7673-89.

Pereira PN, Yoshida A, Sarian LO, Barros RHO, Jales RM, Derchain S. Assessment of the performance of the O-RADS MRI score for the evaluation of adnexal masses, with technical notes. Radiol Bras. 2022;55(3):137-44.

Ruiz M, Labauge P, Louboutin A, Limot O, Fauconnier A, Huchon C. External validation of the MR imaging scoring system for the management of adnexal masses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:115-9.

Zhao SH, Qiang JW, Zhang GF, Ma FH, Cai SQ, Li HM, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for differentiating borderline from malignant epithelial tumours of the ovary: pathological correlation. Eur Radiol. 2014;24(9):2292-9.

Singla V, Dawadi K, Singh T, Prabhakar N, Srinivasan R, Suri V, et al. Multiparametric MRI evaluation of complex ovarian masses. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2021;50(1):34-40.

Guerra A, Cunha TM, Félix A. Magnetic resonance evaluation of adnexal masses. Acta Radiol. 2008;49(6):700-9.