Yang Q, Zhang H, Ma PQ, Peng B, Yin GT, Zhang NN, Wang HB. Value of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging combined with tumor markers in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. World J Clin Cases 2023; 11(31): 7553-7561 [PMID: 38078133 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i31.7553]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Hai-Bao Wang, MD, PhD, Chief Physician, Professor, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, No. 218 Jixi Road, Hefei 230022, Anhui Province, China. wang23415@126.com
Research Domain of This Article
Oncology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Clin Cases. Nov 6, 2023; 11(31): 7553-7561 Published online Nov 6, 2023. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i31.7553
Value of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging combined with tumor markers in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors
Qian Yang, Hui Zhang, Pei-Qi Ma, Bin Peng, Gui-Tao Yin, Nan-Nan Zhang, Hai-Bao Wang
Qian Yang, Hui Zhang, Hai-Bao Wang, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230022, Anhui Province, China
Qian Yang, Taihe Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuyang 236000, Anhui Province, China
Pei-Qi Ma, Bin Peng, Fuyang People’s Hospital, Fuyang 236000, Anhui Province, China
Gui-Tao Yin, No. 2 People’s Hospital of Fuyang City, Fuyang 236000, Anhui Province, China
Nan-Nan Zhang, Linquan People’s Hospital, Fuyang 236000, Anhui Province, China
Author contributions: Yang Q and Zhang H contributed to the conceptualization of this study; Ma PQ, Peng B, Yin GT involved in the methodology of the manuscript; Zhang NN took part in the formal analysis; Wang HB contributed to the investigation; Yang Q prepared the original draft; Wang HB involved in the writing-review and editing, and supervision; and all authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Institutional review board statement: This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University.
Informed consent statement: The informed consent was obtained from all patients before specimen collection.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.
Data sharing statement: The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Hai-Bao Wang, MD, PhD, Chief Physician, Professor, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, No. 218 Jixi Road, Hefei 230022, Anhui Province, China. wang23415@126.com
Received: August 23, 2023 Peer-review started: August 23, 2023 First decision: September 13, 2023 Revised: September 21, 2023 Accepted: October 25, 2023 Article in press: October 25, 2023 Published online: November 6, 2023 Processing time: 74 Days and 23.6 Hours
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Compare the diagnostic performance of ultrasound (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and serum tumor markers alone or in combination for detecting ovarian tumors.
AIM
To investigate the diagnostic value of US, MRI combined with tumor markers in ovarian tumors.
METHODS
The data of 110 patients with ovarian tumors, confirmed by surgery and pathology, were collected in our hospital from February 2018 to May 2023. The dataset included 60 cases of benign tumors and 50 cases of malignant tumors. Prior to surgery, all patients underwent preoperative US and MRI examinations, as well as serum tumor marker tests [carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymis protein 4 (HE4)]. The aim of the study was to compare the diagnostic performance of these three methods individually and in combination for ovarian tumors.
RESULTS
This study found statistically significant differences in the ultrasonic imaging characteristics between benign and malignant tumors. These differences include echo characteristics, presence or absence of a capsule, blood flow resistance index, clear tumor shape, and blood flow signal display rate (P < 0.05). The apparent diffusion coefficient values of the solid and cystic parts in benign tumors were found to be higher compared to malignant tumors (P < 0.05). Additionally, the time-intensity curve image features of benign and malignant tumors showed significant statistical differences (P < 0.05). The levels of serum CA125 and HE4 in benign tumors were lower than those in malignant tumors (P < 0.05). The combined use of US, MRI, and tumor markers in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors demonstrates higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity compared to using each method individually (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
US, MRI, and tumor markers each have their own advantages and disadvantages when it comes to diagnosing ovarian tumors. However, by combining these three methods, we can significantly enhance the accuracy of ovarian tumor diagnosis, enabling early detection and identification of the tumor’s nature, and providing valuable guidance for clinical treatment.
Core Tip: Ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and tumor markers each have their own advantages and disadvantages when it comes to diagnosing ovarian tumors. However, by combining these three methods, we can significantly enhance the accuracy of ovarian tumor diagnosis, enabling early detection and identification of the tumor’s nature, and providing valuable guidance for clinical treatment.
