184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36716716)
1. Accuracy of IOTA Simple Rules, IOTA ADNEX Model, RMI, and Subjective Assessment for Preoperative Adnexal Mass Evaluation: The Experience of a Tertiary Care Referral Hospital.
Vilendecic Z; Radojevic M; Stefanovic K; Dotlic J; Likic Ladjevic I; Dugalic S; Stefanovic A
Gynecol Obstet Invest; 2023; 88(2):116-122. PubMed ID: 36716716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prospective external validation of IOTA methods for classifying adnexal masses and retrospective assessment of two-step strategy using benign descriptors and ADNEX: a Portuguese multicenter study.
Borges AL; Brito M; Ambrósio P; Condeço R; Pinto P; Ambrósio B; Mahomed F; Gama JMR; Bernardo MJ; Gouveia AI; Djokovic D
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2024 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 38477149
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Performance of IOTA Simple Rules, Simple Rules risk assessment, ADNEX model and O-RADS in differentiating between benign and malignant adnexal lesions in North American women.
Hiett AK; Sonek JD; Guy M; Reid TJ
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2022 May; 59(5):668-676. PubMed ID: 34533862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Two-Step Strategy for Optimizing the Preoperative Classification of Adnexal Masses in a University Hospital, Using International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Models: Simple Rules and Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa Model.
Esquivel Villabona AL; Rodríguez JN; Ayala N; Buriticá C; Gómez AC; Velandia AM; Rodríguez N; Alcázar JL
J Ultrasound Med; 2022 Feb; 41(2):471-482. PubMed ID: 33890698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Performance of IOTA Simple Rules Risks, ADNEX Model, Subjective Assessment Compared to CA125 and HE4 with ROMA Algorithm in Discriminating between Benign, Borderline and Stage I Malignant Adnexal Lesions.
Czekierdowski A; Stachowicz N; Smolen A; Łoziński T; Guzik P; Kluz T
Diagnostics (Basel); 2023 Feb; 13(5):. PubMed ID: 36900029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Diagnostic Performance of Ultrasonography-Based Risk Models in Differentiating Between Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumors in a US Cohort.
Yoeli-Bik R; Longman RE; Wroblewski K; Weigert M; Abramowicz JS; Lengyel E
JAMA Netw Open; 2023 Jul; 6(7):e2323289. PubMed ID: 37440228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Multicentre external validation of IOTA prediction models and RMI by operators with varied training.
Sayasneh A; Wynants L; Preisler J; Kaijser J; Johnson S; Stalder C; Husicka R; Abdallah Y; Raslan F; Drought A; Smith AA; Ghaem-Maghami S; Epstein E; Van Calster B; Timmerman D; Bourne T
Br J Cancer; 2013 Jun; 108(12):2448-54. PubMed ID: 23674083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Menopausal status, ultrasound and biomarker tests in combination for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in symptomatic women.
Davenport C; Rai N; Sharma P; Deeks JJ; Berhane S; Mallett S; Saha P; Champaneria R; Bayliss SE; Snell KI; Sundar S
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Jul; 7(7):CD011964. PubMed ID: 35879201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Lesion size affects diagnostic performance of IOTA logistic regression models, IOTA simple rules and risk of malignancy index in discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal masses.
Di Legge A; Testa AC; Ameye L; Van Calster B; Lissoni AA; Leone FP; Savelli L; Franchi D; Czekierdowski A; Trio D; Van Holsbeke C; Ferrazzi E; Scambia G; Timmerman D; Valentin L
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Sep; 40(3):345-54. PubMed ID: 22611001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Performance of IOTA ADNEX model in evaluating adnexal masses in a gynecological oncology center in China.
Chen H; Qian L; Jiang M; Du Q; Yuan F; Feng W
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Dec; 54(6):815-822. PubMed ID: 31152572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. The Prospective External Validation of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules in the Hands of Level I and II Examiners.
Knafel A; Banas T; Nocun A; Wiechec M; Jach R; Ludwin A; Kabzinska-Turek M; Pietrus M; Pitynski K
Ultraschall Med; 2016 Oct; 37(5):516-523. PubMed ID: 26126150
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Prospective external validation of IOTA three-step strategy for characterizing and classifying adnexal masses and retrospective assessment of alternative two-step strategy using simple-rules risk.
Hidalgo JJ; Ros F; Aubá M; Errasti T; Olartecoechea B; Ruiz-Zambrana Á; Alcázar JL
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2019 May; 53(5):693-700. PubMed ID: 30353585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Performance of the IOTA ADNEX model in preoperative discrimination of adnexal masses in a gynecological oncology center.
Araujo KG; Jales RM; Pereira PN; Yoshida A; de Angelo Andrade L; Sarian LO; Derchain S
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jun; 49(6):778-783. PubMed ID: 27194129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. The ADNEX model to triage adnexal masses: An external validation study and comparison with the IOTA two-step strategy and subjective assessment by an experienced ultrasound operator.
Viora E; Piovano E; Baima Poma C; Cotrino I; Castiglione A; Cavallero C; Sciarrone A; Bastonero S; Iskra L; Zola P
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2020 Apr; 247():207-211. PubMed ID: 32146226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluating the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses: validation of O-RADS and comparison with ADNEX model, SA, and RMI.
Wang R; Yang Z
Ginekol Pol; 2023; 94(10):799-806. PubMed ID: 36929789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Vessel morphology depicted by three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound as second-stage test in adnexal tumors that are difficult to classify: prospective diagnostic accuracy study.
Sladkevicius P; Jokubkiene L; Timmerman D; Fischerova D; Van Holsbeke C; Franchi D; Savelli L; Epstein E; Fruscio R; Kaijser J; Czekierdowski A; Guerriero S; Pascual MA; Testa AC; Ameye L; Valentin L
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Feb; 57(2):324-334. PubMed ID: 32853459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
