Role of ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of female pelvic masses with histopathological correlation

Pruthvi Malikireddy,Srinivas Reddy Mukku,Nagaraju Baja
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18231/j.pjms.2023.029
2023-04-08
Panacea Journal of Medical Sciences
Abstract:Adnexal mass that can be suspected as malignant with ultrasonography can be diagnosed as benign lesion at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This will help in preventing inappropriate surgery. MRI gives additional information on composition of soft-tissue masses using differences in MR relaxation properties in various tissue, which is not seen in ultrasonography. To evaluate pelvic pathology by ultrasound and MRI for differentiating malignant and benign tumors in adnexal masses compared with histopathology Prospective comparative study was carried out among 30 patients with suspected pelvic masses. Thorough clinical history was taken followed by physical examination. Clinically or ultrasonographically detected suspicious pelvic masses were subjected to MRI and correlated histopathologically. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for ultrasonography and MRI with histopathology as gold standard Majority were <50 years. Bleeding per vaginum and pain abdomen were most common symptoms in 20% each. As per ultrasonography, most common diagnosis was adnexal mass in 36%. As per MRI, most common diagnosis was ovarian pathology in 47%. As per histopathology, most common diagnosis was cervical cancer, fibroids and benign ovarian pathologies in 20% of cases each. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of USG compared to histopathology was 88.2%; 61.5%; 75% and 80% respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of MRI compared to histopathology was 100%; 92.8%; 84.1% and 100% respectively. On comparison, MRI had better diagnostic accuracy than USG MRI is a very sensitive imaging modality for the evaluation of female patients with suspected or confirmed adnexal masses and disease extent is better evaluated than ultrasonography.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?