Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BackgroundAccurate preoperative characterization of adnexal-ovarian masses is essential for appropriate clinical management.The American College of Radiology Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (ACR O-RADS) ultrasound provides a standardized ultrasound-based framework for malignancy risk stratification. ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS) using ACR O-RADS for adnexal-ovarian masses, with histopathological diagnosis as the reference standard. Materials and methodsThis prospective, single-center, hospital-based observational diagnostic-accuracy study with a crosssectional index-test/reference-standard comparison was conducted over 18 months, from May 2023 to November 2024.Women with suspected adnexal-ovarian masses underwent TVUS, and each lesion was categorized according to the ACR O-RADS ultrasound system.Histopathological examination following surgical excision served as the reference standard.Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated and reported with Wilson 95% CIs. ResultsAmong the 34 adnexal-ovarian masses, histopathological examination classified 16/34 (47.1%; 95% CI: 31.5%-63.3%)as malignant, 15/34 (44.1%; 95% CI: 28.9%-60.5%)as benign, and 3/34 (8.8%; 95% CI: 3.0%-23.0%)as borderline.When O-RADS categories 4 and 5 were considered test-positive and malignant/borderline lesions were combined as disease-positive, O-RADS demonstrated a sensitivity of 100.0%(95% CI: 83.2%-100.0%),specificity of 66.7% (95% CI: 41.7%-84.8%),PPV of 79.2% (95% CI: 59.5%-90.8%),and NPV of 100.0%(95% CI: 72.2%-100.0%).O-RADS category was significantly associated with histopathological classification (p < 0.001); however, the proportion of malignant lesions was identical in O-RADS 4 and O-RADS 5 (66.7% each). ConclusionACR O-RADS demonstrated promising diagnostic performance for characterizing adnexal-ovarian masses in this cohort.These findings require confirmation in larger, consecutively recruited populations before broader conclusions regarding clinical utility can be made.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jain et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: