Accuracy of ultrasonography performed by examiners with varied training and experience in predicting specific pathology of adnexal masses.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic performance of subjective assessment by Level II ultrasound examiners in predicting the specific histology of adnexal masses. METHODS: The women included in this prospective multicenter cross-sectional study were older than 16 years of age and had at least one adnexal mass. They underwent transvaginal sonography (TVS) performed by Level II examiners, all of whom were familiar with the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) group definitions of ultrasound features of ovarian masses. The final outcome was histology. Specific diagnoses were categorized into 16 groups. Agreement between subjective assessment and final histology was measured using unweighted kappa coefficients. Sensitivities and specificities were obtained for subjective assessment. RESULTS: Of the 1279 women who underwent TVS, 313 were included in the final analysis. Overall agreement (16 × 16 table) between subjective assessment and histology was moderate, with a Cohen's kappa coefficient of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.53-0.65). The specificity of subjective assessment ranged between 91% and 100% for all histological subgroups. Highest sensitivities were achieved in the diagnosis of simple cysts (100% (95% CI, 61-100%)), hydrosalpinges (100% (95% CI, 34-100%)), mature teratomas (88% (95% CI, 74-96%)), endometriomas (75% (95% CI, 61-85%)), ovarian fibromas (88% (95% CI, 47-100%)), tubo-ovarian abscesses (88% (95% CI, 47-100%)) and serous cystadenocarcinomas (82% (95% CI, 66-93%)). Serous cystadenomas were misdiagnosed most commonly (40.5%). The sensitivity of subjective assessment in diagnosing adnexal torsion was 54% (95% CI, 25-81%); the 17 confirmed and/or suspected cases of adnexal torsion were not included in the 313 cases examined and analyzed for diagnostic performance. CONCLUSION: Overall, subjective assessment by Level II examiners was good for the detection of simple cysts, endometriomas, mature teratomas, hydrosalpinges, fibroma, tubo-ovarian abscess and serous cystadenocarcinomas.

Multicentre external validation of IOTA prediction models and RMI by operators with varied training.

BACKGROUND: Correct characterisation of ovarian tumours is critical to optimise patient care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the International Ovarian Tumour Analysis (IOTA) logistic regression model (LR2), ultrasound Simple Rules (SR), the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) and subjective assessment (SA) for preoperative characterisation of adnexal masses, when ultrasonography is performed by examiners with different background training and experience. METHODS: A 2-year prospective multicentre cross-sectional study. Thirty-five level II ultrasound examiners contributed in three UK hospitals. Transvaginal ultrasonography was performed using a standardised approach. The final outcome was the surgical findings and histological diagnosis. To characterise the adnexal masses, the six-variable prediction model (LR2) with a cutoff of 0.1, the RMI with cutoff of 200, ten SR (five rules for malignancy and five rules for benignity) and SA were applied. The area under the curves (AUCs) for performance of LR2 and RMI were calculated. Diagnostic performance measures for all models assessed were sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), and the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). RESULTS: Nine-hundred and sixty-two women with adnexal masses underwent transvaginal ultrasonography, whereas 255 had surgery. Prevalence of malignancy was 29% (49 primary invasive epithelial ovarian cancers, 18 borderline ovarian tumours, and 7 metastatic tumours). The AUCs for LR2 and RMI for all masses were 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-0.97) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.83-0.94), respectively. In premenopausal women, LR2-RMI difference was 0.09 (95% CI: 0.03-0.15) compared with -0.02 (95% CI: -0.08 to 0.04) in postmenopausal women. For all masses, the DORs for LR2, RMI, SR+SA (using SA when SR inapplicable), SR+MA (assuming malignancy when SR inapplicable), and SA were 62 (95% CI: 27-142), 43 (95% CI: 19-97), 109 (95% CI: 44-274), 66 (95% CI: 27-158), and 70 (95% CI: 30-163), respectively. CONCLUSION: Overall, the test performance of IOTA prediction models and rules as well as the RMI was maintained in examiners with varying levels of training and experience.

A comparative study of two devices used for cervical cell sampling raises some doubts about liquid-based cytology.

The objective of this study was to compare the quality of smears obtained by a newly designed cervical cell sampler (the implement) to those obtained with the cervex brush, using liquid-based cytology (LBC). A prospective randomized controlled trial with the approval of the local ethics committees after informing the Medical Devices Agency in the UK was used in this study. The study was carried out in colposcopy clinics in two district general NHS Trust Hospitals in London. A total of 200 women were recruited (100 from each hospital). The women were randomized into two groups, each of them having two smears at the same time. One hundred (50%) of the women had their first smear with the new implement, and the other 100 (50%) had their first smear with the cervex brush. The main outcome of this study is good-quality smears, assessed by evidence of effective sampling of the transformation zone, including immature metaplastic cells and also endocervical cells. Eighty-five percent of the smears taken by the new implement showed good-quality smears compared to 91% of those taken by the cervex brush, a statistically marginally nonsignificant result, with P value = 0.052 (McNemar exact test). A larger number of good-quality smears, judged by evidence of sampling of transformation zone, were obtained with the cervex brush, though the difference was statistically marginally nonsignificant, using the British society for clinical cytology criteria. Surprisingly, despite the use of LBC, there was a higher rate of inadequate smears obtained with both the devices (8% with each) compared to our previous study using the conventional slide test (1.3% with the new implement and 1.8% with the Jordan's spatula).