O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk Group
Background: The O-RADS system is a new proposal for establishing the risk of malignancy of adnexal masses using ultrasound. The objective of this study is to assess the agreement and diagnostic performance of O-RADS when using the IOTA lexicon or ADNEX model for assigning the O-RADS risk group. Meth...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-02-01
|
| Series: | Diagnostics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/4/673 |
| _version_ | 1797621543778385920 |
|---|---|
| author | Julio Vara Mariachiara Pagliuca Serena Springer Juan Gonzalez de Canales Isabel Brotons Javiera Yakcich Silvia Ajossa Maria Angela Pascual Stefano Guerriero Juan Luis Alcazar |
| author_facet | Julio Vara Mariachiara Pagliuca Serena Springer Juan Gonzalez de Canales Isabel Brotons Javiera Yakcich Silvia Ajossa Maria Angela Pascual Stefano Guerriero Juan Luis Alcazar |
| author_sort | Julio Vara |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: The O-RADS system is a new proposal for establishing the risk of malignancy of adnexal masses using ultrasound. The objective of this study is to assess the agreement and diagnostic performance of O-RADS when using the IOTA lexicon or ADNEX model for assigning the O-RADS risk group. Methods: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. All women diagnosed as having an adnexal mass underwent transvaginal/transabdominal ultrasound. Adnexal masses were classified according to the O-RADS classification, using the criterion of the IOTA lexicon and according to the risk of malignancy determined by the ADNEX model. The agreement between both methods for assigning the O-RADS group was estimated using weighted Kappa and the percentage of agreement. The sensitivity and specificity of both approaches were calculated. Results: 454 adnexal masses in 412 women were evaluated during the study period. There were 64 malignant masses. The agreement between the two approaches was moderate (Kappa: 0.47), and the percentage of agreement was 46%. Most disagreements occurred for the groups O-RADS 2 and 3 and for groups O-RADS 3 and 4. The sensitivity and specificity for O-RADS using the IOTA lexicon and O-RADS using the ADNEX model were 92.2% and 86.1%, and 85.9% and 87.4%, respectively. Conclusion: The diagnostic performance of O-RADS classification using the IOTA lexicon as opposed to the IOTA ADNEX model is similar. However, O-RADS group assignment varies significantly, depending on the use of the IOTA lexicon or the risk estimation using the ADNEX model. This fact might be clinically relevant and deserves further research. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T08:57:30Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f6d116a1cd2943ec9ec0bad8b63a2675 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2075-4418 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T08:57:30Z |
| publishDate | 2023-02-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Diagnostics |
| spelling | doaj.art-f6d116a1cd2943ec9ec0bad8b63a26752023-11-16T20:01:19ZengMDPI AGDiagnostics2075-44182023-02-0113467310.3390/diagnostics13040673O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk GroupJulio Vara0Mariachiara Pagliuca1Serena Springer2Juan Gonzalez de Canales3Isabel Brotons4Javiera Yakcich5Silvia Ajossa6Maria Angela Pascual7Stefano Guerriero8Juan Luis Alcazar9Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra, 31008 Pamplona, SpainCentro Integrato di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita (PMA) e Diagnostica Ostetrico-Ginecologica, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria-Policlinico Duilio Casula Monserrato, University of Cagliari, 09124 Cagliari, ItalyDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Universita degli Studi di Trieste, 34127 Trieste, ItalyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra, 31008 Pamplona, SpainDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra, 31008 Pamplona, SpainFaculty of Medicine, Los Andes University, Santiago 12455, ChileCentro Integrato di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita (PMA) e Diagnostica Ostetrico-Ginecologica, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria-Policlinico Duilio Casula Monserrato, University of Cagliari, 09124 Cagliari, ItalyDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproduction, Institut Universitari Dexeus, 08028 Barcelona, SpainDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Universita degli Studi di Trieste, 34127 Trieste, ItalyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, University of Navarra, 31008 Pamplona, SpainBackground: The O-RADS system is a new proposal for establishing the risk of malignancy of adnexal masses using ultrasound. The objective of this study is to assess the agreement and diagnostic performance of O-RADS when using the IOTA lexicon or ADNEX model for assigning the O-RADS risk group. Methods: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. All women diagnosed as having an adnexal mass underwent transvaginal/transabdominal ultrasound. Adnexal masses were classified according to the O-RADS classification, using the criterion of the IOTA lexicon and according to the risk of malignancy determined by the ADNEX model. The agreement between both methods for assigning the O-RADS group was estimated using weighted Kappa and the percentage of agreement. The sensitivity and specificity of both approaches were calculated. Results: 454 adnexal masses in 412 women were evaluated during the study period. There were 64 malignant masses. The agreement between the two approaches was moderate (Kappa: 0.47), and the percentage of agreement was 46%. Most disagreements occurred for the groups O-RADS 2 and 3 and for groups O-RADS 3 and 4. The sensitivity and specificity for O-RADS using the IOTA lexicon and O-RADS using the ADNEX model were 92.2% and 86.1%, and 85.9% and 87.4%, respectively. Conclusion: The diagnostic performance of O-RADS classification using the IOTA lexicon as opposed to the IOTA ADNEX model is similar. However, O-RADS group assignment varies significantly, depending on the use of the IOTA lexicon or the risk estimation using the ADNEX model. This fact might be clinically relevant and deserves further research.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/4/673adnexal massultrasounddiagnosisclassificationO-RADS |
| spellingShingle | Julio Vara Mariachiara Pagliuca Serena Springer Juan Gonzalez de Canales Isabel Brotons Javiera Yakcich Silvia Ajossa Maria Angela Pascual Stefano Guerriero Juan Luis Alcazar O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk Group Diagnostics adnexal mass ultrasound diagnosis classification O-RADS |
| title | O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk Group |
| title_full | O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk Group |
| title_fullStr | O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk Group |
| title_full_unstemmed | O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk Group |
| title_short | O-RADS Classification for Ultrasound Assessment of Adnexal Masses: Agreement between IOTA Lexicon and ADNEX Model for Assigning Risk Group |
| title_sort | o rads classification for ultrasound assessment of adnexal masses agreement between iota lexicon and adnex model for assigning risk group |
| topic | adnexal mass ultrasound diagnosis classification O-RADS |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/4/673 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juliovara oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT mariachiarapagliuca oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT serenaspringer oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT juangonzalezdecanales oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT isabelbrotons oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT javierayakcich oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT silviaajossa oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT mariaangelapascual oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT stefanoguerriero oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup AT juanluisalcazar oradsclassificationforultrasoundassessmentofadnexalmassesagreementbetweeniotalexiconandadnexmodelforassigningriskgroup |