Clinicopathological profile of adnexal masses presenting to a tertiary-care hospital in Bhutan

Rojna Rai; Pema Choden Bhutia; Ugyen Tshomo

doi:10.4103/sajc.sajc_303_18

South Asian Journal of Cancer, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · South Asian J Cancer 2019; 08(03): 168-172
DOI: 10.4103/sajc.sajc_303_18

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Gynaecological Cancers

Clinicopathological profile of adnexal masses presenting to a tertiary-care hospital in Bhutan

Rojna Rai

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Postgraduate Medicine, Jigme Dorji Wangchuck National Referral Hospital, Khesar Gyalpo University of Medical Sciences of Bhutan, Thimphu

,

Pema Choden Bhutia

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jigme Dorji Wangchuck National Referral Hospital, Thimphu, Bhutan

,

Ugyen Tshomo

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jigme Dorji Wangchuck National Referral Hospital, Thimphu, Bhutan

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

PDF Download

Abstract

Context: Adnexal masses of ovarian origin are of growing concern due to high fatality associated with ovarian malignancy because they are diagnosed at advanced stage due to vague symptoms and absence of recommended screening tests. Aims: The aim was to study the prevalence of histopathologic types of adnexal masses in different age groups and to analyze the accuracy of preoperative evaluation in diagnosing ovarian malignancy. Settings and Design: This was a cross-sectional study carried out in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of a tertiary care hospital in Bhutan with gynecologic-oncology services, from January to December 2017. Subjects and Methods: Women presenting with adnexal mass were evaluated and those meeting criteria were enrolled. They were evaluated preoperatively with complete history, examination, ultrasound, and tumor markers. Risk of malignancy index (RMI) was calculated for all patients. Following surgery, histopathology results were compared with preoperative evaluation. Statistical Analysis Used: Chi-square test, t-test, Cohen's Kappa, and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were used for statistical analysis. Results: Of 165 patients evaluated, 127 fulfilling criteria were enrolled. Adnexal masses of ovarian origin were most common (n = 102, 80.3%), of which 12.7% were malignant. Epithelial ovarian malignancy was the most common malignant ovarian tumor, serous cystadenocarcinoma being the most common. Malignancy was significantly more in older, postmenopausal women with high RMI. Seven out of 11 women with high RMI were diagnosed in Stage 3 or 4. RMI score at cutoff of 200 was 54.6% sensitive and 85.7% specific. Conclusions: Adnexal mass of ovarian origin was the most common. Malignancy was significantly more in older, postmenopausal women with high RMI. RMI showed moderate correlation in diagnosing epithelial ovarian malignancies.

Key words

Adnexal mass - ovarian cancer - risk of malignancy index

PDF (544 kb)

References

References
1 Berek JS. Berek & Novak's Gynecology. 15th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012. p. 2337-457.
2 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Practice Bulletins – Gynecology. Practice bulletin no 174: Evaluation and management of adnexal masses. Obstet Gynecol 2016;128:e210-26.
3 Yazbek J, Helmy S, Ben-Nagi J, Holland T, Sawyer E, Jurkovic D. Value of preoperative ultrasound examination in the selection of women with adnexal masses for laparoscopic surgery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;30:883-8.
4 Heintz AP, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Beller U, Benedet JL, Creasman WT, et al. Carcinoma of the ovary. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003;66:184-90.
5 Badkur P, Gupta K. Clinico-pathological correlation of adnexal masses in tertiary care centre. Med Sci 2016;5:526-9.
6 Manivasakan J, Arounassalame B. A study of benign adnexal masses. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2012;1:12-6.
7 Sharadha S, Sridevi TA, Renukadevi TK, Gowri R, Binayak D, Indra V. Ovarian masses: Changing clinico histopathological trends. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2015;65:34-8.
8 Gurung P, Hirachand S, Pradhanang S. Histopathological study of ovarian cystic lesions in tertiary care hospital of Kathmandu, Nepal. J Inst Med 2013;35:44-7.
9 Javdekar R, Maitra N. Risk of malignancy index (RMI) in evaluation of adnexal mass. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2015;65:117-21.
10 Berek JS, Hacker NF, Hengst T. Gynecologic Oncology. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2015.
11 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:7-30.
12 Terzic MM, Dotlic J, Likic I, Ladjevic N, Brndusic N, Arsenovic N, et al. Current diagnostic approach to patients with adnexal masses: Which tools are relevant in routine praxis? Chin J Cancer Res 2013;25:55-62.
13 Abbas AM, Zahran KM, Nasr A, Kamel HS. A new scoring model for characterization of adnexal masses based on two-dimensional gray-scale and colour Doppler sonographic features. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2014;6:68-74.