Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
2016 | 16 | 67 | 411–416
Article title

Mucinous borderline ovarian tumor: a case report with diagnostic insights on ultrasound findings

Title variants
Śluzowy guz jajnika o granicznej złośliwości: opis przypadku i spostrzeżenia diagnostyczne
Languages of publication
Borderline ovarian tumors represent about 10% of all epithelial ovarian cancers, but in contrast to epithelial ovarian cancers, they constitute a group of tumors with a much better prognosis. An assessment of clinical presentation, physical examination, radiological and biochemical findings is necessary to tailor management strategies for patients with ovarian tumors. The article, which is based on a case report, describes different approaches for preoperative diagnosis as well as discusses approaches that might bring some insights on tumor histology. Furthermore, it raises a question about which imaging techniques should be proposed for a reliable diagnosis of borderline ovarian tumors to ensure safe surgery planning.
Guzy o granicznej złośliwości stanowią około 10% nabłonkowych nowotworów jajnika, ale w porównaniu z rakami jajnika charakteryzują się lepszym rokowaniem. Analiza obrazu klinicznego, badania fizykalnego, badań radiologicznych i biochemicznych jest niezbędna, by pacjentkę z guzem jajnika skierować na odpowiednie leczenie. W artykule na podstawie przedstawionego przypadku opisano podejścia diagnostyczne do przedoperacyjnego rozpoznania, a także poddano dyskusji badania pozwalające na wgląd w histologię guza oraz kwestię, jakie badania obrazowe powinno się zaproponować, aby z dużym prawdopodobieństwem potwierdzić obecność guzów o granicznej złośliwości i bezpiecznie zaplanować operację.
Physical description
  • 1. Hart WR: Borderline epithelial tumors of the ovary. Mod Pathol 2005; 18 (Suppl. 2): S33–S50.
  • 2. Pados G, Tsolakidis D, Bili H, Athanatos D, Zaramboukas T, Tarlatzis B: Laparoscopic management of unexpected borderline ovarian tumors in women of reproductive age. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2012; 33: 174–177.
  • 3. Sharma A, Apostolidou S, Burnell M, Campbell S, Habib M, Gentry-Maharaj A et al.: Risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in asymptomatic women with ultrasound-detected ovarian masses: a prospective cohort study within the UK collaborative trial of ovarian cancer screening (UKCTOCS). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 40: 338–344.
  • 4. Romeo M, Pons F, Barretina P, Radua J: Incomplete staging surgery as a major predictor of relapse of borderline ovarian tumor. World J Surg Oncol 2013; 11: 13.
  • 5. du Bois A, Ewald-Riegler N, de Gregorio N, Reuss A, Mahner S, Fotopoulou C et al.: Borderline tumours of the ovary: a cohort study of the Arbeitsgmeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) Study Group. Eur J Cancer 2013; 49: 1905–1914.
  • 6. Shih KK, Zhou Q, Huh J, Morgan JC, Iasonos A, Aghajanian C et al.: Risk factors for recurrence of ovarian borderline tumors. Gynecol Oncol 2011; 120: 480–484.
  • 7. Chan JK, Teoh D, Hu JM, Shin JY, Osann K, Kapp DS: Do clear cell ovarian carcinomas have poorer prognosis compared to other epithelial cell types? A study of 1411 clear cell ovarian cancers. Gynecol Oncol 2008; 109: 370–376.
  • 8. Woodward ER, Sleightholme HV, Considine AM, Williamson S, McHugo JM, Cruger DG: Annual surveillance by CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound for ovarian cancer in both high-risk and population risk women is ineffective. BJOG 2007; 114: 1500–1509.
  • 9. Van Calster B, Valentin L, Van Holsbeke C, Testa AC, Bourne T, Van Huffel S et al.: Polytomous diagnosis of ovarian tumors as benign, borderline, primary invasive or metastatic: development and validation of standard and kernel-based risk prediction models. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010; 10: 96.
  • 10. Lucidarme O, Akakpo JP, Granberg S, Sideri M, Levavi H, Schneider A et al.: A new computer-aided diagnostic tool for non-invasive characterisation of malignant ovarian masses: results of a multicentre validation study. Eur Radiol 2010; 20: 1822–1830.
  • 11. Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH, Collins WP, Verrelst H, Vergote I; International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group: Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 16: 500–505.
  • 12. McDonald JM, Doran S, DeSimone CP, Ueland FR, DePriest PD, Ware RA et al.: Predicting risk of malignancy in adnexal masses. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 115: 687–694.
  • 13. Gramellini D, Fieni S, Sanapo L, Casilla G, Verrotti C, Nardelli GB: Diagnostic accuracy of IOTA ultrasound morphology in the hands of less experienced sonographers. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2008; 48: 195–201.
  • 14. Bazot M, Daraï E, Nassar-Slaba J, Lafont C, Thomassin-Naggara I: Value of magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a review. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2008; 32: 712–723.
  • 15. Bent CL, Sahdev A, Rockall AG, Singh N, Sohaib SA, Reznek RH: MRI appearances of borderline ovarian tumours. Clin Radiol 2009; 64: 430–438.
  • 16. Thomassin-Naggara I, Balvay D, Aubert E, Daraï E, Rouzier R, Cuenod CA, Bazot M: Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging analysis of complex adnexal masses: a preliminary study. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 738–745.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.