Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: An International Consensus Statement.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counseling and planning of surgical treatment strategies. This Consensus Statement should be cited as: 'G. Condous, B. Gerges, I. Thomassin-Naggara, C. Becker, C. Tomassetti, H. Krentel, B.J. van Herendael, M. Malzoni, M. S. Abrao, E. Saridogan, J. Keckstein, G. Hudelist and Collaborators. Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: An International Consensus Statement. Eur. J. Radiol. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111450.'

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: an International Consensus Statement.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counseling and planning of surgical treatment strategies. © 2024 The Authors. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, by Universa Press, by The International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy, by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists and by Elsevier B.V.

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: an International Consensus Statement.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), ESHRE, the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers, and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counselling, and planning of surgical treatment strategies.

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: an International Consensus Statement†,‡.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on a review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counselling and planning of surgical treatment strategies.

O-RADS MRI SCORE: An Essential First-Step Tool for the Characterization of Adnexal Masses.

The ovarian-adnexal reporting and data system on magnetic resonance imaging (O-RADS MRI) score is now a well-established tool to characterize pelvic gynecological masses based on their likelihood of malignancy. The main added value of O-RADS MRI over O-RADS US is to correctly reclassify lesions that were considered suspicious on US as benign on MRI. The crucial issue when characterizing an adnexal mass is to determine the presence/absence of solid tissue and thus need to perform gadolinium injection. O-RADS MR score was built on a multivariate analysis and must be applied as a step-by-step analysis: 1) Is the mass an adnexal mass? 2) Is there an associated peritoneal carcinomatosis? 3) Is there any significant amount of fatty content? 4) Is there any wall enhancement? 5) Is there any internal enhancement? 6) When an internal enhancement is detected, does the internal enhancement correspond to solid tissue or not? 7) Is the solid tissue malignant? With its high value to distinguish benign from malignant adnexal masses and its high reproducibility, the O-RADS MRI score could be a valuable tool for timely referral of a patient to an expert center for the treatment of ovarian cancers. Finally, to make a precise diagnosis allowing optimal personalized treatment, the radiologist in gynecological imaging will combine the O-RADS MRI score with many other clinical, biological, and other MR criteria to suggest a pathological hypothesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 3.

Uterine junctional zone and adenomyosis: comparison of MRI, transvaginal ultrasound and histology.

The uterine junctional zone is the subendometrial area in the myometrium that contributes to peristalsis and aids in spermatozoa and blastocyst transport. Alterations in the appearance of the junctional zone on transvaginal sonography (TVS) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are associated with adenomyosis. The lack of standardization of description of its appearance and ill-defined boundaries on both histology and imaging hamper understanding of the junctional zone and limit its role in the diagnosis of adenomyosis. The objectives of this review were to investigate the accordance in definition of the junctional zone across different diagnostic approaches and to examine how imaging findings can be linked to histological findings in the context of diagnosis of adenomyosis. A comprehensive literature review was conducted of articles describing the appearance on imaging and the histological structure of the uterine junctional zone. Our review suggests that the junctional zone is distinguished from the middle and outer myometrium by gradual changes in smooth-muscle cell density, extracellular space, connective tissue, water content and vascular properties. However, while the signal intensity from the junctional zone to the middle myometrium changes abruptly on MRI, the histopathological changes are gradual and its border may be difficult or impossible to distinguish on two-dimensional TVS. Moreover, the thickness of the junctional zone measured on MRI is larger than that measured on TVS. Thus, these two imaging modalities reflect this zone differently. Although a thickened junctional zone is often used to diagnose adenomyosis on MRI, the presence of adenomyosis can be described more accurately as interruptions of the junctional zone by endometrial tissue, which leads to direct signs on imaging such as subendometrial lines and buds on two- and three-dimensional TVS or bright foci on MRI. The histopathological criteria for diagnosis are based on enlargement of the uterus with severe adenomyosis, and might not reflect its early stages. Clinicians should be aware that findings on MRI cannot be extrapolated readily to ultrasound. An understanding of this is necessary when investigating the uterine junctional zone as a functional unit and the association between visualization of direct features of adenomyosis in the junctional zone and clinical symptoms. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

O-RADS MRI score: analysis of misclassified cases in a prospective multicentric European cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively review the causes of categorization errors using O-RADS-MRI score and to determine the presumptive causes of these misclassifications. METHODS: EURAD database was retrospectively queried to identify misclassified lesions. In this cohort, 1194 evaluable patients with 1502 pelvic masses (277 malignant / 1225 benign lesions) underwent standardized MRI to characterize adnexal masses with histology or 2 years' follow-up as a reference standard. An expert radiologist reviewed cases with two junior radiologists and lesions termed misclassified if malignant lesion was scored ≤ 3, a benign lesion was scored ≥ 4, the site of origin was incorrect, or a non-adnexal mass was incorrectly categorized as benign or malignant. RESULTS: There were 139 / 1502 (9.2%) misclassified masses in 116 women including 109 adnexal and 30 non-adnexal masses. False-negative cases corresponded to 16 borderline or invasive malignant adnexal masses rated score ≤ 3 (16 / 139, 11.5%). False-positive cases corresponded to 88 benign masses were rated score 4 (67 / 139, 48.2%) or 5 (18 / 139,12.9%) or considered suspicious non-adnexal lesions (3 / 139, 2.2%). Misclassifications were only due to origin error in 12 adnexal masses (8 benign, 4 malignant) (8.6%, 12 / 139) and 23 non-adnexal masses (18 benign, 5 malignant,16.5%, 23 / 139) perceived respectively as non-adnexal and adnexal masses. Interpretive error (n = 104), failure to recognize technical insufficient exams (n = 9), and perceptual errors (n = 4) were found. Most interpretive was due to misinterpretation of solid tissue or incorrect assignment of mass origin. Eighty-four out of 139 cases were correctly reclassified by the readers with strict adherence to the score rules. CONCLUSION: Most errors were due to misinterpretation of solid tissue or incorrect assignment of mass origin. KEY POINTS: • Prospective assignment of O-RADS-MRI score resulted in misclassification of 9.25% of sonographically indeterminate pelvic masses. • Most errors were interpretive (74.8%) due to misinterpretation of solid tissue as defined by the lexicon or incorrect assignment of mass origin. • Pelvic inflammatory disease is a common source of misclassification (8.9%) (12 / 139).

Fertility preservation in women with malignant and borderline ovarian tumors: Experience of the French ESGO-certified center and pregnancy-associated cancer network (CALG).

OBJECTIVE: To describe strategy and results of fertility preservation (FP) in patients with malignant and borderline ovarian tumors. METHODS: Consecutive cohort study of 43 women with malignant or borderline ovarian tumors who underwent FP between February 2013 and July 2019. The study was conducted in national expert center in Tenon University Hospital, Sorbonne University: French ESGO-certified ovarian cancer center and pregnancy-associated cancer network (CALG). Main outcome measure was FP technique proposed by multidisciplinary committee, FP technique used, time after surgery, number of fragments, histology and follicle density (if ovarian tissue freezing), number of expected, retrieved and frozen oocytes (if ovarian stimulation). RESULTS: Pathological diagnosis was malignant epithelial ovarian tumor in five women (11.6%), rare malignant ovarian tumor in 14 (32.6%), borderline in 24 (55.8%), and mostly unilateral (79.1%) and stage I (76.7%). Mean age at diagnosis was 26.8 ± 6.9 years and mean tumor size 109.7 ± 61 mm. Before FP, mean AFC was 11.0 ± 6.1 and AMH levels were 2.7 ± 4.6 ng/mL. Six ovarian tissue-freezing procedures were performed (offered to 13). Twenty-four procedures of ovarian stimulation and oocyte freezing were performed after surgical treatment for 19 women (offered to 28) with a median interval of 188 days. The mean number of mature oocytes retrieved per stimulation was 12.4 ± 12.8. At least 10 mature oocytes were frozen for 52.6% of the women. No FP was offered to five women. CONCLUSION: Oocyte and ovarian tissue cryopreservation should be offered to patients with malignant and borderline ovarian tumors. More data are needed to confirm ovarian stimulation and ovarian tissue grafting safety.

Borderline ovarian tumors: Guidelines from the French national college of obstetricians and gynecologists (CNGOF).

It is recommended to classify Borderline Ovarian Tumors (BOTs) according to the WHO classification. Transvaginal and suprapubic ultrasonography are recommended for the analysis of an ovarian mass (Grade A). In case of an undetermined ovarian lesion on ultrasonography, it is recommended to perform a pelvic MRI (Grade A) with a score for malignancy (ADNEX MR/O-RADS) (Grade C) included in the report and to formulate a histological hypothesis (Grade C). Pelvic MRI is recommended to characterize a tumor suspected of being BOT (Grade C). It is recommended to evaluate serum levels of HE4 and CA125 and to use the ROMA score for the diagnosis of indeterminate ovarian mass on imaging (grade A). If there is a suspicion of a mucinous BOT on imaging, serum levels of CA 19-9 may be proposed (Grade C). For Early Stages (ES) of BOT, if surgery without risk of tumor rupture is possible, laparoscopy with protected extraction is recommended over laparotomy (Grade C). For treatment of a bilateral serous ES BOT with a strategy to preserve fertility and/or endocrine function, bilateral cystectomy is recommended where possible (Grade B). For mucinous BOTs with a treatment strategy of fertility and/or endocrine function preservation, unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is recommended (grade C). For mucinous BOTs treated by initial cystectomy, unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy is recommended (grade C). For serous or mucinous ES BOTs, routine hysterectomy is not recommended (Grade C). For ES BOTs, lymphadenectomy is not recommended (Grade C). For ES BOTs, appendectomy is recommended only in case of a macroscopically pathological appendix (Grade C). Restaging surgery is recommended in cases of serous BOTs with micropapillary architecture and an incomplete abdominal cavity inspection during initial surgery (Grade C). Restaging surgery is recommended for mucinous BOTs after initial cystectomy or in cases where the appendix was not examined (Grade C). If restaging surgery is decided for ES BOTs, the following procedures should be performed: peritoneal washing (grade C), omentectomy (grade B), complete exploration of the abdominal cavity with peritoneal biopsies (grade C), visualization of the appendix and appendectomy in case of a pathological macroscopic appearance (grade C) as well as unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in case of a mucinous BOT initially treated by cystectomy (grade C). In advanced stages (AS) of BOT, it is not recommended to perform a lymphadenectomy as a routine procedure (Grade C). For AS BOT in a patient with a desire to fall pregnant, conservative treatment involving preservation of the uterus and all or part of the ovary may be proposed (Grade C). Restaging surgery aimed at removing all lesions, not performed initially, is recommended for AS BOTs (Grade C). After treatment, follow-up for a duration greater than 5 years is recommended due to the median recurrence time of BOTs (Grade B). It is recommended that a systematic clinical examination be carried out during follow-up of a treated BOT (Grade B). If the determination of tumor markers is normal preoperatively, the routine dosage of tumor markers in BOT follow-up is not recommended (Grade C). In case of an initial elevation in serum CA 125 levels, it is recommended to monitor CA 125 during follow up (Grade B). In case of conservative treatment, it is recommended to use transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasound during follow up of a treated BOT (Grade B). In the event of a BOT recurrence in a woman of childbearing age, a second conservative treatment may be proposed (Grade C). A consultation with a physician specialized in Assisted Reproductive Technique (ART) should be offered in the case of BOTs in women of childbearing age (Grade C). When possible, a conservative surgical strategy is recommended to preserve fertility in women of childbearing age (Grade C). In the case of optimally treated BOT, there is no evidence to contraindicate the use of ART. The use of hormonal contraception after serous or mucinous BOT is not contraindicated (Grade C). After management of mucinous BOT, for women under 45 years, given the benefit of Hormonal Replacement Therapy (HRT) on cardiovascular and bone risks, and the lack of hormone sensitivity of mucinous BOTs, it is recommended to offer HRT (Grade C). Over 45 years of age, HRT can be prescribed in case of a climacteric syndrome after individual benefit to risk assessment (Grade C).

Comparison of breast density assessment between human eye and automated software on digital and synthetic mammography: Impact on breast cancer risk.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the agreement between automatic assessment software of breast density based on artificial intelligence (AI) and visual assessment by a senior and a junior radiologist, as well as the impact on the assessment of breast cancer risk (BCR) at 5 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively included 311 consecutive women (mean age, 55.6±8.5 [SD]; range: 40-74 years) without a personal history of breast cancer who underwent routine mammography between January 1, 2019 and February 28, 2019. Mammographic breast density (MBD) was independently evaluated by a junior and a senior reader on digital mammography (DM) and synthetic mammography (SM) using BI-RADS (5th edition) and by an AI software. For each MBD, BCR at 5 years was estimated per woman by the AI software. Interobserver agreement for MBD between the two readers and the AI software were evaluated by quadratic κ coefficients. Reproducibility of BCR was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Agreement for MBD assessment on DM and SM was almost perfect between senior and junior radiologists (κ=0.88 [95% CI: 0.84-0.92] and κ=0.86 [95% CI: 0.82-0.90], respectively) and substantial between the senior radiologist and AI (κ=0.79; 95% CI: 0.73-0.84). There was substantial agreement between DM and SM for the senior radiologist (κ=0.79; 95% CI: 0.74-0.84). BCR evaluation at 5 years was highly reproducible between the two radiologists on DM and SM (ICC=0.98 [95% CI: 0.97-0.98] for both), between BCR evaluation based on DM and SM evaluated by the senior (ICC=0.96; 95% CI: 0.95-0.97) or junior radiologist (ICC=0.97; 95% CI: 0.96-0.98) and between the senior radiologist and AI (ICC=0.96; 95% CI: 0.95-0.97). CONCLUSION: This preliminary study demonstrates a very good agreement for BCR evaluation based on the evaluation of MBD by a senior radiologist, junior radiologist and AI software.

[Borderline Ovarian Tumours: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Imaging]. / Tumeurs frontières de l'ovaire. Recommandations pour la pratique clinique du CNGOF ­ Imagerie.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the place of imaging and the performance of different imaging techniques (transvaginal ultrasound with or without Doppler, scoring, CT, MRI) to differentiate benign tumour, borderline ovarian tumour (BOT) and malignant ovarian tumor. Differentiate the histological subtypes of BOT (serous, sero-mucinous, mucinous) and prediction in imaging of the possibility of conservative treatment. METHODS: The research was carried out over the last 16 years using the terms "MeSH" based on the query of the Medline® database and supplemented by the review of references contained in the meta-analyzes, systematic reviews and original articles included. RESULTS: Endo-vaginal and suprapubic ultrasonography is recommended for analysis of an ovarian mass (grade A). In the case of ultrasound by a referent, subjective analysis is the recommended technique (grade A). In case of echography by a non-referent, the use of "Simple Rules" is recommended (grade A) and should be best combined with subjective analysis to rejoin the performance of a sonographer refer (grade A). In cases of undetermined ovarian lesions in endovaginal ultrasound and suprapubic ultrasound, it is recommended to perform a pelvic MRI (grade A). The MRI protocol should include T2, T1, T1 sequences with fat saturation, diffusion, injected dynamics, and after gadolinium injection (grade B). To characterize an MRI-adnexal image, it is recommended to include a risk score for malignancy (ADNEX-MR/O-RADS) (grade C) in the report and to formulate an anatomopathological hypothesis (Grade C). The predictive signs of benignity in front of a cyst with endocystic vegetations are the low number, the small size, the presence of calcifications and the absence of Doppler flow in case of size greater than 10mm in echography (LP 4) and a curve of type 1 MRI (LP4). MRI is recommended for suspicious lesions of BOT in ultrasound (grade B) or indeterminate lesions in ultrasound (grade A). There is no data to support the usefulness of CT or PET-CT for BOT. Morphological criteria in ultrasound and MRI exist to differentiate BOT from invasive tumors regardless of grade (NP 2). Pelvic MRI is recommended to characterize a tumor suggestive of ultrasound BOT (grade C). No recommendations can be made about the use of combined ultrasound, biological, and menopausal status scores for the diagnosis of BOT. The diagnostic performance of imaging to detect peritoneal implants of BOT is not known. The assessment of the invasiveness of peritoneal implants of imaging BOT has not been evaluated. The association of macroscopic signs in MRI makes it possible to differentiate the different subtypes - serous, sero-mucinous and mucinous (intestinal type) - of BOT, despite the overlap of certain presentations (LP3). The analysis of macroscopic MRI signs must be performed to differentiate the different subtypes of TFO (grade C). No recommendation can be made on imaging prediction of the possibility of conservative BOT treatment.

[Borderline Ovarian Tumours: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Short Text]. / Tumeurs frontières de l'ovaire. Recommandations pour la pratique clinique du CNGOF ­ Texte court.

This work was carried out under the aegis of the CNGOF (Collège national des gynécologues et obstétriciens français) and proposes guidelines based on the evidence available in the literature. The objective was to define the diagnostic and surgical management strategy, the fertility preservation and surveillance strategy in Borderline Ovarian Tumor (BOT). No screening modality can be proposed in the general population. An expert pathological review is recommended in case of doubt concerning the borderline nature, the histological subtype, the invasive nature of the implant, for all micropapillary/cribriform serous BOT or in the presence of peritoneal implants, and for all mucinous or clear cell tumors (grade C). Macroscopic MRI analysis should be performed to differentiate the different subtypes of BOT: serous, seromucinous and mucinous (intestinal type) (grade C). If preoperative biomarkers are normal, follow up of biomarkers is not recommended (grade C). In cases of bilateral early serous BOT with a desire to preserve fertility and/or endocrine function, it is recommended to perform a bilateral cystectomy if possible (grade B). In case of early mucinous BOT, with a desire to preserve fertility and/or endocrine function, it is recommended to perform a unilateral adnexectomy (grade C). Secondary surgical staging is recommended in case of serous BOT with micropapillary appearance and uncomplete inspection of the abdominal cavity during initial surgery (grade C). For early-stage serous or mucinous BOT, it is not recommended to perform a systematic hysterectomy (grade C). Follow up after BOT must be pursued for more than 5 years (grade B). Conservative treatment involving at least the conservation of the uterus and a fragment of the ovary in a patient wishing to conceive may be proposed in advanced stages of BOT (grade C). A new surgical treatment that preserves fertility after a first non-invasive recurrence may be proposed in women of childbearing age (grade C). It is recommended to offer a specialized consultation for Reproductive Medicine when diagnosing BOT in a woman of childbearing age. Hormonal contraceptive use after serous or mucinous BOT is not contraindicated (grade C).

[Borderline Ovarian Tumours: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Pregnancy]. / Tumeurs frontières de l'ovaire. Recommandations pour la pratique clinique du CNGOF ­ Grossesse.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the place of imaging, tumour markers, type of treatment and surgical route, follow-up, delivery mode, and re-staging in case of BOT during pregnancy, in order to provide guidelines. METHOD: A systematic bibliographical analysis on BOT during pregnancy was performed through a PUDMED search on articles published from 1990 to 2019 using keywords « borderline ovarian tumour and pregnancy ¼. RESULTS: Pelvic ultrasound is the gold standard and first-line examination for the detection and characterization of adnexal masses during pregnancy (grade C). Pelvic MRI is recommended from 12 gestational weeks in case of indeterminate adnexal masses and should be concluded by a diagnostic score (grade C). Gadolinium injection should be minimized because of proven risk to the fetus and should be discussed on a case-by-case basis after patient information (grade C). In the absence of data in the literature, it is not possible to recommend the use of any tumour marker for the diagnosis of BOT during pregnancy. In case of a surgical treatment of BOT during pregnancy, there is insufficient evidence to recommend either a cystectomy or an oophorectomy. For BOT, the laparoscopic approach should be preferred during pregnancy if it is feasible (grade C). Surgical route and type of surgery should be chosen after taking into account the tumour size, the obstetrical term, and the subsequent desire for pregnancy, following discussion in a multidisciplinary meeting. In the absence of sufficient data in the literature, it is not possible to make any recommendation on the follow-up of a BOT suspected during pregnancy. There is not enough evidence in the literature to change obstetrical management for delivery in patients with BOT. In case of incomplete staging of a BOT treated during pregnancy, restaging can be discussed as for non-pregnant patients (grade C). CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of BOT occurring during pregnancy remains rare despite systematic screening of adnexal masses in the first trimester of pregnancy and an increasing maternal age. There is limited data in the literature concerning the management of BOT during pregnancy. All decisions must be taken after discussion in a multidisciplinary meeting.

Artificial intelligence and breast screening: French Radiology Community position paper.

The objective of this article was to evaluate the evidence currently available about the clinical value of artificial intelligence (AI) in breast imaging. Nine experts from the disciplines involved in breast disease management - including physicists and radiologists - convened a meeting on June 3, 2019 to discuss the evidence for the use of this technology in plenary and focused sessions. Prior to the meeting, the group performed a literature review on predefined topics. This paper presents the consensus reached by this working group on recommendations for the future use of AI in breast screening and related research topics.

Management of epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, primary peritoneum. Long text of the joint French clinical practice guidelines issued by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY, endorsed by INCa. (Part 2: systemic, intraperitoneal treatment, elderly patients, fertility preservation, follow-up).

Adjuvant chemotherapy by carboplatin and paclitaxel is recommended for all high-grade ovarian and tubal cancers (FIGO stages I-IIA) (grade A). After primary surgery is complete, 6 cycles of intravenous chemotherapy (grade A) are recommended, or a discussion with the patient about intraperitoneal chemotherapy, according to her risk-benefit ratio. After complete interval surgery for FIGO stage III, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can be proposed, in accordance with the modalities of the OV-HIPEC trial (grade B). In cases of postoperative tumor residue or in FIGO stage IV tumors, chemotherapy associated with bevacizumab is recommended (grade A).

Management of epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneum. Long text of the Joint French Clinical Practice Guidelines issued by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, and GINECO-ARCAGY, and endorsed by INCa. Part 1: Diagnostic exploration and staging, surgery, perioperative care, and pathology.

An MRI is recommended for an ovarian mass that is indeterminate on ultrasound. The ROMA score (combining CA125 and HE4) can also be calculated (grade A). In presumed early-stage ovarian or tubal cancers, the following procedures should be performed: an omentectomy (at a minimum, infracolic), an appendectomy, multiple peritoneal biopsies, peritoneal cytology (grade C), and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomies (grade B) for all histologic types, except the expansile mucinous subtypes, for which lymphadenectomies can be omitted (grade C). Minimally invasive surgery is recommended for early-stage ovarian cancer, when there is no risk of tumor rupture (grade B). For FIGO stages III or IV ovarian, tubal, and primary peritoneal cancers, a contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan of the thorax/abdomen/pelvis is recommended (grade B), as well as laparoscopic exploration to take multiple biopsies (grade A) and a carcinomatosis score (Fagotti score at a minimum) (grade C) to assess the possibility of complete surgery (i.e., leaving no macroscopic tumor residue). Complete surgery by a midline laparotomy is recommended for advanced ovarian, tubal, or primary peritoneal cancer (grade B). For advanced cancers, para-aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomies are recommended when metastatic adenopathy is clinically or radiologically suspected (grade B). When adenopathy is not suspected and when complete peritoneal surgery is performed as the initial surgery for advanced cancer, the lymphadenectomies can be omitted because they do not modify either the medical treatment or overall survival (grade B). Primary surgery (before other treatment) is recommended whenever it appears possible to leave no tumor residue (grade B).

Management of epithelial cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneum. Short text of the French Clinical Practice Guidelines issued by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, and GINECO-ARCAGY, and endorsed by INCa.

An MRI is recommended for an ovarian mass that is indeterminate on ultrasound. The ROMA score (combining CA125 and HE4) can also be calculated (Grade A). In presumed early-stage ovarian or tubal cancers, the following procedures should be performed: an omentectomy (at a minimum, infracolic), an appendectomy, multiple peritoneal biopsies, peritoneal cytology (grade C), and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomies (Grade B) for all histologic types, except the expansile mucinous subtypes, for which lymphadenectomies can be omitted (grade C). Minimally invasive surgery is recommended for early-stage ovarian cancer, when there is no risk of tumor rupture (grade B). Adjuvant chemotherapy by carboplatin and paclitaxel is recommended for all high-grade ovarian and tubal cancers (FIGO stages I-IIA) (grade A). For FIGO stage III or IV ovarian, tubal, and primary peritoneal cancers, a contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan of the thorax/abdomen/pelvis is recommended (Grade B), as well as laparoscopic exploration to take multiple biopsies (grade A) and a carcinomatosis score (Fagotti score at a minimum) (grade C) to assess the possibility of complete surgery (i.e., leaving no macroscopic tumor residue). Complete surgery by a midline laparotomy is recommended for advanced ovarian, tubal, or primary peritoneal cancers (grade B). For advanced cancers, para-aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomies are recommended when metastatic adenopathy is clinically or radiologically suspected (grade B). When adenopathy is not suspected and when complete peritoneal surgery is performed as the initial surgery for advanced cancer, the lymphadenectomies can be omitted because they do not modify either the medical treatment or overall survival (grade B). Primary surgery (before other treatment) is recommended whenever it appears possible to leave no tumor residue (grade B). After primary surgery is complete, 6 cycles of intravenous chemotherapy (grade A) are recommended, or a discussion with the patient about intraperitoneal chemotherapy, according to her risk-benefit ratio. After complete interval surgery for FIGO stage III disease, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can be proposed, in accordance with the modalities of the OV-HIPEC trial (grade B). In cases of postoperative tumor residue or in FIGO stage IV tumors, chemotherapy associated with bevacizumab is recommended (grade A).

[Part II drafted from the short text of the French guidelines entitled "Initial management of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer" developed by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY and endorsed by INCa. (Systemic and intraperitoneal treatment, elderly, fertility preservation, follow-up)]. / Partie 2 rédigée à partir de la synthèse de la recommandation nationale de bonnes pratiques cliniques intitulée « Conduites à tenir initiales devant des patientes atteintes d'un cancer épithélial de l'ovaire ¼ élaborée par FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY et labélisée par l'INCa. (Traitement systémique et intrapéritonéal, personnes âgées, préservation de la fertilité et suivi).

Adjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel is recommended for all high-grade ovarian or Fallopian tube cancers, stage FIGO I-IIA (grade A). After a complete first surgery, it is recommended to deliver 6 cycles of intravenous (grade A) or to propose intraperitoneal (grade B) chemotherapy, to be discussed with patient, according to the benefit/risk ratio. After a complete interval surgery for a FIGO III stage, the hyperthermic intra peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can be proposed in the same conditions of the OV-HIPEC trial (grade B). In case of tumor residue after surgery or FIGO stage IV, chemotherapy associated with bevacizumab is recommended (grade A). For BRCA mutated patient, Olaparib is recommended (grade B).