2022 / 05

Next Paper
DOI: 10.24075/brsmu.2022.050

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Comparative assessment of RMI-IV and RMI-V in preoperative prediction of ovarian tumor type in pregnant women

Gerasimova AA1, Shevchenko YuV1, Klimenko PA2, Asyrafyan LA3
About authors

1 Center of Family Planning and Reproduction of the Moscow Healthcare Department, Moscow, Russia

2 Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Moscow, Russia

3 Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Moscow, Russia

Correspondence should be addressed: Pyotr A. Klimenko
Sevastolopsky prospect, 24а, Moscow, 117209, Russia; ur.liam@oknemilk.ap

About paper

Author contribution: the authors contributed equally to the study and manuscript writing, read and approved the final version of the paper prior to publishing.

Compliance with ethical standards: the study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University (protocol № 176 of 25 June 2018). All patients submitted the informed consent to study participation.

Received: 2022-09-27 Accepted: 2022-10-12 Published online: 2022-10-24
|
  1. Stilidi IA, Aksel EM. Standartizirovannye pokazateli onkoehpidemiologicheskoj situacii 2016 g. Mezhdunarodnyj nauchno-prakticheskij zhurnal. Evrazijskij onkologicheskij zhurnal. 2018; 6 (2): 261–325. Russian.
  2. Hoover K, Jenkins TR. Evaluation and management of adnexal mass in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 97–102.
  3. Moore RG, Miller MC, Eklund EE, et al. Serum levels of the ovarian cancer biomarker HE4 are decreased in pregnancy and increase with age. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 206: 349–54.
  4. Sarandakou A, Protonotariou E, Rizos D. Tumor markers in biological fluids associated with pregnancy. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2007; 44: 151.
  5. Yacobozzi M, Nguyen D, et al. Adnexal Masses in Pregnancy. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI. 2012; 33: 55–64.
  6. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Ovarian cancer: recognition and initial management. Clinical guideline. 2011; 1–20.
  7. Diagnostika i lechenie dobrokachestvennyx novobrazovanij yaichnikov s pozicii profilaktiki raka. Klinicheskie rekomendacii (protokol lecheniya). Pis'mo Minzdrava RF. 2018. # 15-4/10/27838. Dostupno po ssylke: https://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/ prime/doc/72047432/. Russian.
  8. Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J, Turner J, Frost C, Grudzinskas JG. A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1990; 97 (10): 922–29.
  9. Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, Onsrud M, Kiserud T, et al. Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index based on serum CA125, ultrasound findings and menopausal status in the preoperative diagnosis of pelvic masses. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996; 103 (8): 826–31.
  10. Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, Halvorsen T, Nustad K, et al. The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals. Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 93 (3); 448–52.
  11. Yamamoto Y, Yamada R, Oguri H, Maeda N, Fukaya T. Comparison of four malignancy risk indices in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pelvic masses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009; 144 (2): 163–67.
  12. Tailor A, Jurcovic D, Bourne T. Sonographic prediction of malignancy in adnexal masses using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 10: 41–47.
  13. Timmerman D, Bourne T, Taylor A. A comparison of methods of the pre-operative discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses. The development of a new logistic regression model. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 181: 57–65.
  14. Timmerman D, Verrelst H, Bourne T. Artificial neural network models for the preoperative discrimination between malignant and benign adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 13: 17–25.
  15. Valentin L, Hagen B, Tingulstad S, Eik-Nes S. Comparison of pattern recognition and logistic regression models for discrimination between benign and malignant pelvic masses. A prospective cross validation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 18: 357–65.
  16. Campbell S. Ovarian cancer: role of ultrasound in preoperative diagnosis and population screening. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 40: 245–54.
  17. Gerasimova AA, Gus AI, Klimenko PA. avtory; Gerasimova AA, Gus AI, Klimenko PA, patentoobladateli. Sposob differencial'noj diagnostiki opuxolepodobnyx obrazovanij i opuxolej yaichnikov u beremennyx. Patent RF # 2325118; 05.06.07. Russian.
  18. Gerasimova AA, Shvyrev SL, Solomatina AA, Gus AI, Klimenko PA. Sposob vyyavleniya xaraktera yaichnikovyx obrazovanij. Onkologiya. 2013; 1: 34–40. Russian.
  19. Yamamoto Y, Tsuchida A, Ushiwaka T, et al. Comparsion of 4 risk-of-malignancy index in preoperative evaluation of patients with pelvic masses: а prospective study. Clinical ovarian and other gynecologic cancer. 2015; 7 (1): 8–12.
  20. Joshi R, Baral G. Modified Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI 5) in ovarian tumor. Nep J ObstetGynecol. 2021; 16 (32): 97–102. DOI: doi.org/10.3126/njog.v16i1.37617.
  21. Egunova MA, Kucenko IG, Dmitrieva AI, Pikalova LV, Kungurova EA, i dr. Sravnitel'naya ehffektivnost' sovremennyx metodov differencial'noj diagnostiki ob"emnyx obrazovanij yaichnikov Zh. Mat' i ditya v Kuzbase. 2018; 3 (74): 16–22. Russian.
  22. Ulyanova AV, Ponomaryova YuN, Ashrafyan LA. Sovershenstvovanie differencial'no-diagnosticheskix metodov pri novoobrazovaniyax yaichnikov. Zh. Ginekologiya. Ehndokrinologiya. 2018; 6 (150): 40–43. Russian.
  23. Martynov SA, Adamyan LV, Lipatenkova YuI, Kalabuxova EA, Uchevatkina PV, i dr. Vozmozhnosti neinvazivnyx metodov diagnostiki v opredelenii struktury opuxolej i opuxolevidnyx obrazovanij yaichnikov vo vremya beremennosti. Zh. Ginekologiya. 2015; 16 (6): 44–48. Russian.