157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19604425)
1. Risk of malignancy index in the evaluation of patients with adnexal masses.
Clarke SE; Grimshaw R; Rittenberg P; Kieser K; Bentley J
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2009 May; 31(5):440-5. PubMed ID: 19604425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Risk of malignancy index for adnexal masses.
Akdeniz N; Kuyumcuoğlu U; Kale A; Erdemoğlu M; Caca F
Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2009; 30(2):178-80. PubMed ID: 19480249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Should cut-off values of the risk of malignancy index be changed for evaluation of adnexal masses in Asian and Pacific populations?
Yavuzcan A; Caglar M; Ozgu E; Ustun Y; Dilbaz S; Ozdemir I; Yildiz E; Gungor T; Kumru S
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2013; 14(9):5455-9. PubMed ID: 24175841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The risk of malignancy index (RMI) in women with adnexal masses in Wales.
Abdulrahman GO; McKnight L; Lutchman Singh K
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Sep; 53(3):376-81. PubMed ID: 25286794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. External validation of the adapted Risk of Malignancy Index incorporating tumor size in the preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses.
van den Akker PA; Zusterzeel PL; Aalders AL; Snijders MP; Samlal RA; Vollebergh JH; Kluivers KB; Massuger LF
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2011 Dec; 159(2):422-5. PubMed ID: 21824712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of the risk malignancy index diagnostic value in patients with adnexal masses.
Terzić M; Dotlić J; Ladjević IL; Atanacković J; Ladjević N
Vojnosanit Pregl; 2011 Jul; 68(7):589-93. PubMed ID: 21899180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The risk of malignancy index in discrimination of adnexal masses.
Ulusoy S; Akbayir O; Numanoglu C; Ulusoy N; Odabas E; Gulkilik A
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2007 Mar; 96(3):186-91. PubMed ID: 17280665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of the Risk of Malignancy Index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses.
van den Akker PA; Aalders AL; Snijders MP; Kluivers KB; Samlal RA; Vollebergh JH; Massuger LF
Gynecol Oncol; 2010 Mar; 116(3):384-8. PubMed ID: 19959215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Risk of malignancy index in preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses.
Ashrafgangooei T; Rezaeezadeh M
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2011; 12(7):1727-30. PubMed ID: 22126553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Role of a risk of malignancy index in clinical approaches to adnexal masses.
Simsek HS; Tokmak A; Ozgu E; Doganay M; Danisman N; Erkaya S; Gungor T
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2014; 15(18):7793-7. PubMed ID: 25292065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risk of malignancy index in the preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses.
Obeidat BR; Amarin ZO; Latimer JA; Crawford RA
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2004 Jun; 85(3):255-8. PubMed ID: 15145261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules and the risk of malignancy index to discriminate between benign and malignant adnexal masses.
Auekitrungrueng R; Tinnangwattana D; Tantipalakorn C; Charoenratana C; Lerthiranwong T; Wanapirak C; Tongsong T
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2019 Sep; 146(3):364-369. PubMed ID: 31206642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The accuracy of risk malignancy index in prediction of malignancy in women with adnexal mass in Basrah, Iraq.
Al-Asadi JN; Al-Maliki SK; Al-Dahhhan F; Al-Naama L; Suood F
Niger J Clin Pract; 2018 Oct; 21(10):1254-1259. PubMed ID: 30297555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of risk of malignancy index (RMI), CA125, CA 19-9, ultrasound score, and menopausal status in borderline ovarian tumor.
Alanbay I; Akturk E; Coksuer H; Ercan M; Karaşahin E; Dede M; Yenen MC; Ozan H; Baser I
Gynecol Endocrinol; 2012 Jun; 28(6):478-82. PubMed ID: 22122561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Oncogynecological aspects of adnexal masses].
Gasparov AS; Zhordania ; Paianidi IuG; Dubinskaia ED
Vestn Ross Akad Med Nauk; 2013; (8):9-13. PubMed ID: 24340638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparisons of Effectiveness in Differentiating Benign from Malignant Ovarian Masses between Conventional and Modified Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI).
Tantipalakorn C; Tinnangwattana D; Lerthiranwong T; Luewan S; Tongsong T
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2023 Jan; 20(1):. PubMed ID: 36613208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Predictive Value of Malignancy Risk Indices for Ovarian Masses in Premenopausal and Postmenopausal Women.
Ertas S; Vural F; Vural F; Tufekci EC; Ertas AC; Kose G; Aka N
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2016; 17(4):2177-83. PubMed ID: 27221915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of risk of malignancy indices; RMI 1-4 in borderline ovarian tumor.
Yenen MC; Alanbay I; Aktürk E; Ercan CM; Coksuer H; Karaşahin E; Ozan H; Dede M
Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2012; 33(2):168-73. PubMed ID: 22611957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Adnexal masses difficult to classify as benign or malignant using subjective assessment of gray-scale and Doppler ultrasound findings: logistic regression models do not help.
Valentin L; Ameye L; Savelli L; Fruscio R; Leone FP; Czekierdowski A; Lissoni AA; Fischerova D; Guerriero S; Van Holsbeke C; Van Huffel S; Timmerman D
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Oct; 38(4):456-65. PubMed ID: 21520475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Estimating risk of malignancy in adnexal masses: external validation of the ADNEX model and comparison with other frequently used ultrasound methods.
Meys EMJ; Jeelof LS; Achten NMJ; Slangen BFM; Lambrechts S; Kruitwagen RFPM; Van Gorp T
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jun; 49(6):784-792. PubMed ID: 27514486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
