Addition of parity to the risk of malignancy index score in evaluating adnexal masses

作者：Yavuzcan Ali^*; Caglar Mete; Ozgu Emre; Ustun Yusuf; Dilbaz Serdar; Ozdemir Ismail; Gungor Tayfun; Kumru Selahattin

来源：Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2014, 53(4): 518-522.

DOI：10.1016/j.tjog.2014.08.003

• adnexal lesion
• parity
• risk of malignancy index

Objective: The aim of our study was to evaluate the individual contribution of parity when incorporated as another parameter into the four risk of malignancy indices (RMI 1-4) to differentiate noninvasive benign lesions from invasive malignant ovarian lesions.
Materials and methods: After calculating RMI 1-4 for each patient included in this study, the resulting RMI scores were further multiplied by the parity score (P) of each patient to calculate the RMI parity (RMIP) score.
Results: A cutoff value of 300 for RMIP 1 yielded 95.0% specificity, 97.4% negative predictive value (NPV), 88.5% sensitivity, and 79.3% positive predictive value (PPV) and performed better than RMI 1 in the preoperative diagnosis of invasive malignant lesions. RMIP 2 with a cutoff value of 400 yielded 95.0% specificity, 97.4% NPV, 88.5% sensitivity, and 79.3% PPV, and it also performed better than RMI 2. A cutoff value of 400 for RMIP 3 provided 97.5% specificity, 97.5% NPV, 88.5% sensitivity, and 88.5% PPV and performed better than RMI 3. However, a cutoff value of 400 for RMIP 4 provided 90.0% specificity, 97.3% NPV, 88.5% sensitivity, and 65.7% PPV but did not perform better than RMI 4 in the preoperative diagnosis of invasive malignant lesions.
Conclusion: RMIP 1-3 scales were more reliable tools for the preoperative diagnosis of invasive adnexal masses compared with the traditional RMI 1-3 scales.

• 出版日期2014-12