Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound for detection of endometriosis using International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) approach: prospective international pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) in predicting deep endometriosis (DE) following the International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) consensus methodology. METHODS: This was an international multicenter prospective diagnostic accuracy study involving eight centers across six countries (August 2018-November 2019). Consecutive participants with endometriosis suspected based on clinical symptoms or historical diagnosis of endometriosis were included. The index test was TVS performed preoperatively in accordance with the IDEA consensus statement. At each center, the index test was interpreted by a single sonologist. Reference standards were: (1) direct visualization of endometriosis at laparoscopy, as determined by a non-blinded surgeon with expertise in endometriosis surgery; and (2) histological assessment of biopsied/excised tissue. Surgery was performed within 12 months following the index TVS. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-) of TVS in the diagnosis of DE were calculated. RESULTS: Included in the study were 273 participants with complete clinical, TVS, laparoscopic and histological data. Of these, based on histology, 256 (93.8%) were confirmed to have endometriosis, including superficial endometriosis, and 190 (69.6%) were confirmed to have DE. Based on surgical visualization, 207/273 (75.8%) patients had DE. For DE overall, the diagnostic performance of TVS based on surgical visualization as the reference standard was as follows: accuracy, 86.1%; sensitivity, 88.4%; specificity, 78.8%; PPV, 92.9%; NPV, 68.4%; LR+, 4.17; LR-, 0.15, and the diagnostic performance of TVS based on histology as the reference standard was as follows: accuracy, 85.9%; sensitivity, 89.8%; specificity, 75.9%; PPV, 90.4%; NPV, 74.6%; LR+, 3.72; LR-, 0.13. CONCLUSIONS: Using the IDEA consensus methodology provides strong diagnostic accuracy for TVS assessment of DE. We found a higher TVS detection rate of DE overall than that reported by the most recent meta-analysis on the topic (sensitivity, 79%), albeit with a lower specificity. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Correction to: The use of PIPAC (pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy) in gynecological oncology: a statement by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie (AGO) Kommission Ovar, AGO Study Group, North-Eastern German Society of Gynaecologic Oncology (NOGGO), AGO Austria and AGO Switzerland.

The title of the article has been published incorrectly. The correct title is given below.

The use of PIPAC (pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy) in gynecological oncology: a statement by the "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR)", the Swiss and Austrian AGO, and the North-Eastern German Society of Gynaecologic Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal carcinomas primarily affect the peritoneal cavity, and they are typically diagnosed at an advanced tumor stage (Foley, Rauh-Hain, del Carmen in Oncology (Williston Park) 27:288-294, 2013). In the course of primary surgery, postoperative tumor residuals are, apart from the tumor stage, the strongest independent factors of prognosis (du Bois, Reuss, Pujade-Lauraine, Harter, Ray-Coquard, Pfisterer in Cancer 115:1234-1244, 2009). Due to improved surgical techniques, including the use of multi-visceral procedures, macroscopic tumor clearance can be achieved in oncological centers, in most cases (Harter, Muallem, Buhrmann et al in Gynecol Oncol 121:615-619, 2011). However, to date, it has not been shown that peritoneal carcinomatosis is, per se, an independent factor of prognosis or that it excludes the achievement of tumor clearance. Several studies have shown that a preceding drug therapy in peritoneal carcinomatosis could positively influence the overall prognosis (Trimbos, Trimbos, Vergote et al in J Natl Cancer Inst 95:105-112, 2003). In relapses of ovarian carcinoma, studies have shown that peritoneal carcinomatosis is a negative predictor of complete tumor resection; however, when it is possible to resect the tumor completely, peritoneal carcinomatosis does not play a role in the prognosis (Harter, Hahmann, Lueck et al in Ann Surg Oncol 16:1324-1330, 2009). RESULTS: PIPAC is a highly experimental method for treating patients with ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal cancer. To date, only three studies have investigated a total of 184 patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (Grass, Vuagniaux, Teixeira-Farinha, Lehmann, Demartines, Hubner in Br J Surg 104:669-678, 2017). Only some of those studies were phase I/II studies that included PIPAC for patients with different indications and different cancer entities. It is important to keep in mind that the PIPAC approach is associated with relatively high toxicity. To date, no systematic dose-finding studies have been reported. Moreover, no studies have reported improvements in progression-free or overall survival associated with PIPAC therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Randomized phase III studies are required to evaluate the effect of this therapy compared to other standard treatments (sequential or simultaneous applications with systemic chemotherapy). In cases of ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal cancer, PIPAC should not be performed outside the framework of prospective, controlled studies.