433 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31206642)
21. Diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules for adnexal masses classification: a comparison between two centers with different ovarian cancer prevalence.
Ruiz de Gauna B; Rodriguez D; Olartecoechea B; Aubá M; Jurado M; Gómez Roig MD; Alcázar JL
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2015 Aug; 191():10-4. PubMed ID: 26066289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Simple Rules to Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Guidelines for Detection of Malignancy in Adnexal Cysts.
Patel-Lippmann KK; Sadowski EA; Robbins JB; Paroder V; Barroilhet L; Maddox E; McMahon T; Sampene E; Wasnik AP; Blaty AD; Maturen KE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Mar; 214(3):694-700. PubMed ID: 31770022
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. 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]
25. Subjective assessment by ultrasound is superior to the risk of malignancy index (RMI) or the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) in discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses.
Van Gorp T; Veldman J; Van Calster B; Cadron I; Leunen K; Amant F; Timmerman D; Vergote I
Eur J Cancer; 2012 Jul; 48(11):1649-56. PubMed ID: 22226481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. 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]
27. 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]
28. Efficacy of IOTA simple rules, O-RADS, and CA125 to distinguish benign and malignant adnexal masses.
Xie WT; Wang YQ; Xiang ZS; Du ZS; Huang SX; Chen YJ; Tang LN
J Ovarian Res; 2022 Jan; 15(1):15. PubMed ID: 35067220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. Unilocular adnexal cysts with papillary projections but no other solid components: is there a diagnostic method that can classify them reliably as benign or malignant before surgery?
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; 2013 May; 41(5):570-81. PubMed ID: 22915541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Comparative diagnostic accuracy of the IOTA SRR and LR2 scoring systems for discriminating between malignant and Benign Adnexal masses by junior physicians in Chinese patients: a retrospective observational study.
Tian C; Wen SB; Zhao CY; Yan XN; Du JX
BMC Womens Health; 2023 Nov; 23(1):585. PubMed ID: 37940895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. IOTA simple rules for discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal masses: prospective external validation.
Alcázar JL; Pascual MÁ; Olartecoechea B; Graupera B; Aubá M; Ajossa S; Hereter L; Julve R; Gastón B; Peddes C; Sedda F; Piras A; Saba L; Guerriero S
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2013 Oct; 42(4):467-71. PubMed ID: 23576304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Clinical Utility of Risk Models to Refer Patients with Adnexal Masses to Specialized Oncology Care: Multicenter External Validation Using Decision Curve Analysis.
Wynants L; Timmerman D; Verbakel JY; Testa A; Savelli L; Fischerova D; Franchi D; Van Holsbeke C; Epstein E; Froyman W; Guerriero S; Rossi A; Fruscio R; Leone FP; Bourne T; Valentin L; Van Calster B
Clin Cancer Res; 2017 Sep; 23(17):5082-5090. PubMed ID: 28512173
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of different strategies to triage women with adnexal masses: a prospective study.
Piovano E; Cavallero C; Fuso L; Viora E; Ferrero A; Gregori G; Grillo C; Macchi C; Mengozzi G; Mitidieri M; Pagano E; Zola P
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Sep; 50(3):395-403. PubMed ID: 27706929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Ultrasound examination, MRI, or ROMA for discriminating between inconclusive adnexal masses as determined by IOTA Simple Rules: a prospective study.
Chacon E; Arraiza M; Manzour N; Benito A; Mínguez JÁ; Vázquez-Vicente D; Castellanos T; Chiva L; Alcazar JL
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2023 Jun; 33(6):951-956. PubMed ID: 37055169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. A prospective study to evaluate the risk malignancy index and its diagnostic implication in patients with suspected ovarian mass.
Dora SK; Dandapat AB; Pande B; Hota JP
J Ovarian Res; 2017 Aug; 10(1):55. PubMed ID: 28806987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Interobserver agreement in describing adnexal masses using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis simple rules in a real-time setting and using three-dimensional ultrasound volumes and digital clips.
Ruiz de Gauna B; Sanchez P; Pineda L; Utrilla-Layna J; Juez L; Alcázar JL
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Jul; 44(1):95-9. PubMed ID: 24265132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Prospective comparative trial comparing O-RADS, IOTA ADNEX model, and RMI score for preoperative evaluation of adnexal masses for prediction of ovarian cancer.
Poonyakanok V; Tanmahasamut P; Jaishuen A
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2023 May; 49(5):1412-1417. PubMed ID: 36895122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. 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]
40. Ultrasound differentiation between benign versus malignant adnexal masses in pregnant patients.
Rabiej-Wronska E; Wiechec M; Pitynski K; Wiercinska E; Kotlarz A
Ginekol Pol; 2022; 93(8):643-649. PubMed ID: 35072237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
