GynecologyGynecologyГинекология2079-56962079-5831Consilium Medicum5850610.26442/20795696.2020.6.200519REVIEWОБЗОРReview ArticleMultyparametric MRI in differential diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumorsМультипараметрическая магнитно-резонансная томография в дифференциальной диагностике эпителиальных опухолей яичниковNosovaJulia V.НосоваЮлия Витальевна
Russian Federation

Graduate Student

акушер-гинеколог, онколог, аспирант

yu_nosova@oparina4.ruSolopovaAlina E.СолоповаАлина Евгеньевна
Russian Federation

D. Sci. (Med.)

д-р мед. наук, доц., вед. науч. сотр. отд-ния лучевой диагностики

a_solopova@oparina4.ruKhabasGrigorii N.ХабасГригорий Николаевич
Russian Federation

Cand. Sci. (Med.)

канд. мед. наук, зав. отд-нием инновационной онкологии и гинекологии

g_khabas@oparina4.ruKulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and PerinatologyФГБУ «Национальный медицинский исследовательский центр акушерства, гинекологии и перинатологии имени академика В.И. Кулакова» Минздрава России2412202022627311801202118012021Copyright ©; 2020, Consilium MedicumCopyright ©; 2020, ООО "Консилиум Медикум"2020Consilium MedicumООО "Консилиум Медикум"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0https://gynecology.orscience.ru/2079-5831/article/view/58506

Systematic analysis of publications concerning differential diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumors has been done. Review includes articles published in MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials over the last 10 years. The objective of this study was to evaluate the ability of MRI with quantitative perfusion (DCE) and diffusion analysis (DWI) for preoperative differential diagnosis of indeterminate ovarian tumors. DCE-MRI parameters and ADC may represent imaging biomarkers for predicting the nature of ovarian tumors. Authors now recommend that for complex cystic or cystic-solid masses, both DWI and DCE MRI are used, if available.

Проведен систематический анализ исследований, опубликованных в последние 10 лет и посвященных использованию функциональных методик магнитно-резонансной томографии (МРТ) в ранней и дифференциальной диагностике эпителиальных опухолей яичников, с использованием актуальных данных: базы данных SCOPUS, подборки ведущих научных монографий SCOPUS, pubmed.org, elibrary.ru (с расширенным доступом к полнотекстовым ресурсам), ресурсов NCCN, ECR, ESUR, ACR. Дифференциальная диагностика опухолей яичников имеет решающее значение для выбора последующего алгоритма обследования и лечения пациента. В последние годы исследователи выдвинули гипотезу о том, что применение функциональных методик наряду с базовым протоколом МРТ органов малого таза позволяет улучшить диагностические показатели в характеристике новообразований яичников с «пограничным риском злокачественности». Нами обобщен и проанализирован опыт ведущих мировых центров, занимающихся вопросами внедрения новых методик МРТ и изучения их диагностических возможностей.

ovarian tumorsdynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imagingdifferential diagnosismagnetic resonance imaging with diffusion analysisapparent diffusion coefficientTIC-curvesрак яичниковэпителиальные опухоли яичниковонкологиядифференциальная диагностикамультипараметрическая магнитно-резонансная томографиядиффузионно-взвешенная магнитно-резонансная томографиямагнитно-резонансная томография с динамическим контрастным усилениемвременная кривая интенсивности сигналаThe work has been carried out as a part of the grants of RF President for governmental support of young Russia scientists PhD and DSc «Development of algorithms for diagnostics and monitoring of treatment for ovarian tumors based on the comprehensive use of radiation and laboratory research methods» (MD-130.2019.7).Работа выполнена в рамках реализации Гранта Президента РФ для государственной поддержки молодых российских ученых – докторов наук «Разработка алгоритмов диагностики и мониторинга лечения опухолей яичников на основе комплексного применения лучевых и лабораторных методов исследования» (МД-130.2019.7).Management of Suspected Ovarian Masses in Premenopausal Women (Green-top Guideline N 62): RCOG/BSGE Joint Guideline/British Society of Gynecological Endoscopy (BSGE). London: RCOG, 2011. https://www.rcog.org.uk/en/guidelines-research-services/guidelines/gtg62Макаров О.В., Борисенко С.А. Профилактика, диагностика, лечение рака яичников. Российский медицинский журнал. 1996; 3: 36–40. [Makarov O.V., Borisenko S.A. Prophylaxis, diagnosis, treatment of ovarian cancer. Med J Russ Feder. 1996; 3: 36–40 (in Russian).]Гаспаров А.С., Жорданиа К.И., Паяниди Ю.Г., Дубинская Е.Д. Онкогинекологические аспекты кистозных образований яичников. Вестн. РАМН. 2013; 8 (68): 9–13. [Gasparov A.S., Zhordania K.I., Payanidi Y.G., Dubinskaya E.D. Oncogynecologycal aspects of adnexal masses. Ann Russ Acad Med Sci. 2013; 68 (8): 9–13 (in Russian).]Jayson GC, Kohn EC, Kitchener HC, Ledermann JA. Ovarian cancer. Lancet 2014; 384: 1376–88.Chien J, Poole E. Ovarian cancer prevention, screening and early detection: report from the 11th Biennial Ovarian Cancer Research Symposium. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2018; 27: S20–2.Institute of Medicine, Committee on the State of the Science in Ovarian Cancer Research, Board on Health Care Services et al. Ovarian Cancers: Evolving Paradigms in Research and Care. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US), 2016.Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A et al. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 2011; 305 (22): 2295–303. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.766Gilbert L, Basso O, Sampalis J et al. Assessment of symptomatic women for early diagnosis of ovarian cancer: results from the prospective DOvE pilot project. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13 (3): 285–91. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70333-3Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R et al. Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol 2009; 10 (4): 327–40. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70026-9Mohaghegh P, Rockall AG. Imaging strategy for early ovarian cancer: characterization of adnexal masses with conventional and advanced imaging techniques. Radiographics 2012; 32 (6): 1751–73. DOI: 10.1148/rg.326125520Thomassin-Naggara I, Cuenod CA, Darai E et al. Dynamic contrast- enhanced MR imaging of ovarian neoplasms: current status and future perspectives. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2008; 16 (4): 661–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2008.07.012Anthoulakis C, Nikoloudis N, Pelvic MRI. As the “gold standard” in the subsequent evaluation of ultrasound-indeterminate adnexal lesions: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 132: 661–8.Timmerman D, Ameye L, Fischerova D et al. Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group. BMJ 2010; 341: c6839.Van Calster, Van Hoorde K, Valentin L et al. Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. BMJ 2014; 349: g5920. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g5920Andreotti RF, Timmerman D, Benacerraf BR et al. Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting Lexicon for Ultrasound: A White Paper of the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 2018; 15 (10): 1415–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.07.004Pereira PN, Sarian LO, Yoshida A et al. Accuracy of the ADNEX MR scoring system based on a simplified MRI protocol for the assessment of adnexal masses. Diagn Interv Radiol 2018; 24: 63–71.Солопова А.Е., Макацария А.Д., Сдвижков А.М., Терновой С.К. Магнитно-резонансная томография в дифференциальной диагностике образований яичника. Возможности количественной мультипараметрической оценки. Акушерство и гинекология. 2017; 2: 80–85. DOI: 10.18565/aig.2017.2.80-5 [Solopova AE, Makatsaria AD, Sdvizhkov AM, Ternovoy SK. Magnetic resonance imaging in the differential diagnosis of ovarian masses: Capabilities of quantitative multiparametric evaluation. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2017; 2: 80–5. DOI: 10.18565/aig.2017.2.80-5 (in Russian).]Kwee TC, Takahara T, Ochiai R et al. Diffusion-weighted whole-body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): features and potentional applications in oncology. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 1937–52.Koh DM, Collins DJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR 2007; 188 (6): 1622–35.Figueiras RG, Goh V, Padhani AR et al. The role of functional imaging in colorectal cancer. AJR 2010; 195 (1): 54–66.Mohaghegh P, Rockall A. Imaging strategy for early ovarian cancer: characterization of adnexal masses with conventional and advanced imaging techniques. Radiographics 2012; 32 (6): 1751–73. DOI: 10.1148/rg.326125520Zhao SH, Qiang JW, Zhang GF et al. Diffusion-weighted MRimaging for differentiating borderline from malignant epithelial tumors of the ovary: pathological correlation. Eur Radiol 2014; 24 (9): 2292–9. DOI: 10.1007/s00330– 014–3236–4Li W, Chu C, Cui Y et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI: a useful technique to discriminate benign versus malignant ovarian surface epithelial tumors with solid and cystic components. Abdom Imaging 2012; 37: 897–903.Katayama M, Masui T, Kobayashi S et al. Diffusion-weighted echo planar imaging of ovarian tumors: is it useful to measure apparent diffusion coefficients? J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002; 26: 250–6.Thomassin-Naggara I, Darai E, Cuenod CA et al. Contribution of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for predicting benignity of complex adnexal masses. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 1544–52.Kim HJ, Lee SY, Shin YR et al. The value of diffusion-weighted imaging in the differential diagnosis of ovarian lesions: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0149465.Zhang P, Cui Y, Li W et al. Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted imaging with conventional MR imaging for differentiating complex solid and cystic ovarian tumors at 1.5 T. World J Surg Oncol 2012; 10: 237.Ren J, Huan Y, Wang H et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatic carcinoma: correlation with angiogenesis. Clin Radiol 2008; 63: 153–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2007.07.023Ho VB, Allen SF, Hood MN, Choyke PL. Renal masses: quantitative assessment of enhancement with dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 2002; 224: 695–700. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2243011048Koo HR, Cho N, Song IC et al. Correlation of perfusion parameters on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with prognostic factors and subtypes of breast cancers. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 36: 145–51. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23635Tofts PS, Berkowitz B, Schnall MD. Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model. Magn Reson Med. 1995; 33: 564–568. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910330416Paweletz N, Knierim M. Tumor-related angiogenesis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 1989; 9: 197–242. DOI: 10.1016/S1040-8428(89)80002-2Thomassin-Naggara I, Bazot M, Daraï E et al. Epithelial ovarian tumors: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 2008; 248: 148–59. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2481071120Bernardin L, Dilks P, Liyanage S et al. Effectiveness of semi-quantitative multi-phase dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a predictor of malignancy in complex adnexal masses: radiological and pathological correlation. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 880–90. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-011-2331-zLi HM, Qiang JW, Ma FH, Zhao SH. The value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in characterizing complex ovarian tumors. J Ovarian Res 2017; 10: 4. DOI: 10.1186/s13048-017-0302-yThomassin-Naggara I, Balvay D, Aubert E et al. Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging analysis of complex adnexal masses: a preliminary study. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 738–45. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-011-2329-6Forstner R, Thomassin-Naggara I, Cunha TM et al. ESUR recommendations for MR imaging of the sonographically indeterminate adnexal mass: an update. Eur Radiol 2017; 27: 2248–57. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4600-3Thomassin-Naggara I, Daraï E, Cuenod CA et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a useful tool for characterizing ovarian epithelial tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 28 (1): 111–20. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21377Li X, Hu LJ, Zhu LM et al. The clinical value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in differential diagnosis of malignant and benign ovarian lesions. Tumor Biol 2015; 36 (7): 5515–22. DOI: 10.1007/s13277-015-3219-3Dilks P, Narayanan P, Reznek R et al. Can quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI independently characterize an ovarian mass? Eur Radiol 2010; 20 (9): 2176–83. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1795-6Bernardin L, Dilks P, Liyanage S et al. Effectiveness of semi-quantitative multiphase dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a predictor of malignancy in complex adnexal masses: radiological and pathological correlation. Eur Radiol 2012; 22 (4): 880–90. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-011-2331-zMansour SM, Saraya S, EI-Faissal Y. Semi-quantitative contrast-enhanced MR analysis of indeterminate ovarian tumors: when to say malignancy? Br J Radiol 2015; 88 (1053): 20150099. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20150099Li HM, Qiang JW, Ma FH et al. The value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in characterizing complex ovarian tumors. J Ovarian Res 2017; 10: 4.Emad-Eldin S, Grace MN, Wahba MH et al. The diagnostic potential of diffusion weighted and dynamic contrast enhanced MR imaging in the characterization of complex ovarian lesions. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 2018; 49: 884–91.Farhood Saremi. Perfusion imaging in clinical practice. 2015.Carter JS, Koopmeiners JS, Kuehn-Hajder JE et al. Quantitative multiparametric MRI of ovarian cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 38 (6): 1501–9.Li H, Feng F, Qiang J et al. Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiating benign, borderline, and malignant ovarian tumors. Abdom Radiol 2018; 43: 3132–41. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-018-1569-1