Cargando…

Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules

BACKGROUND: To validate the clinical value of simple rules in distinguishing malignant adnexal masses from benign ones and to explore the effect of simple rules for experienced and less-experienced sonographers. METHODS: Patients with persistent adnexal masses were enrolled between November 2013 and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ning, Chun-ping, Ji, Xiaoli, Wang, Hong-qiao, Du, Xiao-ying, Niu, Hai-tao, Fang, Shi-bao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6125987/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30185198
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1479-2
_version_ 1783353249153155072
author Ning, Chun-ping
Ji, Xiaoli
Wang, Hong-qiao
Du, Xiao-ying
Niu, Hai-tao
Fang, Shi-bao
author_facet Ning, Chun-ping
Ji, Xiaoli
Wang, Hong-qiao
Du, Xiao-ying
Niu, Hai-tao
Fang, Shi-bao
author_sort Ning, Chun-ping
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To validate the clinical value of simple rules in distinguishing malignant adnexal masses from benign ones and to explore the effect of simple rules for experienced and less-experienced sonographers. METHODS: Patients with persistent adnexal masses were enrolled between November 2013 and December 2015. All masses were proven through histological examinations. Five sets of diagnoses were made and compared with one another. Diagnosis 1 was made, according to the simple rules, by a trainee with little clinical diagnostic experience. Diagnoses 2 and 3 were made by experienced and less-experienced sonographers, respectively, according to their clinical experiences. With diagnosis 1 as a reference, the two sonographers were asked to provide a second diagnosis, which were diagnoses 4 and 5. The efficiency of the five sets of diagnoses was compared using ROC curves. RESULTS: In total, 75 malignant (37.7%) and 124 benign lesions (62.3%) were enrolled in this study. The mean diameter of the benign masses was obviously smaller than that of the malignant ones (6.8 ± 3.4 cm vs. 9.3 ± 4.9 cm, p < 0.01). The malignant ratio in postmenopausal women was much higher (66.1%) than that in the premenopausal population (25.7%) (p < 0.0001). Totally, 156 of the 199 cases (79.4%) resulted in conclusive diagnoses. Sensitivity and specificity were 98.4% and 73.9%, respectively, among the conclusive cases. The area under the ROC curve (Az) for the simple rule diagnosis was significantly lower than that for the experienced sonographer diagnosis (0.85 vs. 0.96, p < 0.0001); compared with the less-experienced sonographer, this difference was not significant (0.85 vs. 0.86, p = 0.9776). No significant difference was found in the comparison between the diagnoses made by the experienced sonographer before and after referencing the simple rule diagnosis (Az, 0.96 vs. 0.97, p = 0.2055). Using diagnosis 1 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of the less-experienced sonographer increased (from 0.86 to 0.92, p = 0.012); however, it was still lower than that of the experienced sonographer (Az, 96% vs. 92%, p = 0.0241). CONCLUSIONS: The simple rules was an appealing method for discriminating malignant masses from benign ones, particularly for a less-experienced sonographer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6125987
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61259872018-09-10 Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules Ning, Chun-ping Ji, Xiaoli Wang, Hong-qiao Du, Xiao-ying Niu, Hai-tao Fang, Shi-bao World J Surg Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To validate the clinical value of simple rules in distinguishing malignant adnexal masses from benign ones and to explore the effect of simple rules for experienced and less-experienced sonographers. METHODS: Patients with persistent adnexal masses were enrolled between November 2013 and December 2015. All masses were proven through histological examinations. Five sets of diagnoses were made and compared with one another. Diagnosis 1 was made, according to the simple rules, by a trainee with little clinical diagnostic experience. Diagnoses 2 and 3 were made by experienced and less-experienced sonographers, respectively, according to their clinical experiences. With diagnosis 1 as a reference, the two sonographers were asked to provide a second diagnosis, which were diagnoses 4 and 5. The efficiency of the five sets of diagnoses was compared using ROC curves. RESULTS: In total, 75 malignant (37.7%) and 124 benign lesions (62.3%) were enrolled in this study. The mean diameter of the benign masses was obviously smaller than that of the malignant ones (6.8 ± 3.4 cm vs. 9.3 ± 4.9 cm, p < 0.01). The malignant ratio in postmenopausal women was much higher (66.1%) than that in the premenopausal population (25.7%) (p < 0.0001). Totally, 156 of the 199 cases (79.4%) resulted in conclusive diagnoses. Sensitivity and specificity were 98.4% and 73.9%, respectively, among the conclusive cases. The area under the ROC curve (Az) for the simple rule diagnosis was significantly lower than that for the experienced sonographer diagnosis (0.85 vs. 0.96, p < 0.0001); compared with the less-experienced sonographer, this difference was not significant (0.85 vs. 0.86, p = 0.9776). No significant difference was found in the comparison between the diagnoses made by the experienced sonographer before and after referencing the simple rule diagnosis (Az, 0.96 vs. 0.97, p = 0.2055). Using diagnosis 1 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of the less-experienced sonographer increased (from 0.86 to 0.92, p = 0.012); however, it was still lower than that of the experienced sonographer (Az, 96% vs. 92%, p = 0.0241). CONCLUSIONS: The simple rules was an appealing method for discriminating malignant masses from benign ones, particularly for a less-experienced sonographer. BioMed Central 2018-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6125987/ /pubmed/30185198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1479-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Ning, Chun-ping
Ji, Xiaoli
Wang, Hong-qiao
Du, Xiao-ying
Niu, Hai-tao
Fang, Shi-bao
Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules
title Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules
title_full Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules
title_fullStr Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules
title_full_unstemmed Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules
title_short Association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules
title_sort association between the sonographer’s experience and diagnostic performance of iota simple rules
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6125987/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30185198
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1479-2
work_keys_str_mv AT ningchunping associationbetweenthesonographersexperienceanddiagnosticperformanceofiotasimplerules
AT jixiaoli associationbetweenthesonographersexperienceanddiagnosticperformanceofiotasimplerules
AT wanghongqiao associationbetweenthesonographersexperienceanddiagnosticperformanceofiotasimplerules
AT duxiaoying associationbetweenthesonographersexperienceanddiagnosticperformanceofiotasimplerules
AT niuhaitao associationbetweenthesonographersexperienceanddiagnosticperformanceofiotasimplerules
AT fangshibao associationbetweenthesonographersexperienceanddiagnosticperformanceofiotasimplerules