Errors of sonography in the diagnosis of the prevalence rate of ovarian cancer

Aleksandr N. Vostrov; V. I Kazakevich; L. A Mitina; S. O Stepanov; N. S Skreptsova; E. G Novikova

doi:10.18821/2313-8726-2017-4-1-40-44

V.F.Snegirev Archives of Obstetrics and Gynecology ›› 2017, Vol. 4 ›› Issue (1) : 40 -44. DOI: 10.18821/2313-8726-2017-4-1-40-44

Original study articles

research-article

Errors of sonography in the diagnosis of the prevalence rate of ovarian cancer

Author information +

History +

PDF

Abstract

The article is devoted to the diagnosis of ovarian cancer diseases with the use of sonographic examination. There were evaluated possibilities and disadvantages of the sonographic ultrasonic method in the evaluation of the prevalence rate of ovarian cancer. The study summarizes the results of the observation of 500 patients with the diagnosis of ovarian cancer, underwent the comprehensive treatment. For the improvement of the quality ofgynecological cancer diagnosis of diseases and the identification of causes of diagnostic errors, there was performed a comparative analysis of ultrasound conclusions, data about operation findings and results of morphological studies of drugs.

Keywords

ovarian cancer / sonographic investigation

Cite this article

Download citation ▾

Aleksandr N. Vostrov, V. I Kazakevich, L. A Mitina, S. O Stepanov, N. S Skreptsova, E. G Novikova. Errors of sonography in the diagnosis of the prevalence rate of ovarian cancer. V.F.Snegirev Archives of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2017, 4(1): 40-44 DOI:10.18821/2313-8726-2017-4-1-40-44

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户忘记密码

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within

[1]	Синицина М.Е. Роль ультразвуковой томографии в предоперационном стадировании и оценке эффективности лечения рака яичников: Дисс. ... канд. мед. наук. М.; 2007.

[2]	Бохман Я.В. Лекции по онкогинекологии. М.: Медицинское информационное агентство; 2007.

[3]	Савельева Г.М. и др. Значение дополнительных методов исследования в диагностике опухолей и опухолевидных образований яичников. Международный медицинский журнал. 2001; (1): 79-87.

[4]	Каприн А.Д., Старинский В.В., Петрова Г.В. (ред.). Состояние онкологической помощи населению России в 2013 году. М.; 2014.

[5]	Jayde V., White K., Blomfield P. Symptoms and diagnostic delay in ovarian cancer: a summary of the literature. Contemp. Nurse. 2009; 34: 55-65.

[6]	Medeiros L.R., Freitas L.B., Rosa D.D., Silva F.R., Silva L.S., Birtencourt L.T. et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in ovarian tumor: a systematic quantitative review. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 204 (1): 67.e1-10.

[7]	Carter J. An experience with transvaginal sonography in gynecologic tumors surveillance Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2000; 40 (4): 438-41.

[8]	Jelovac D., Armstrong D.K. Recent progress in the diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer. C.A. Cancer J. Clin. 2011; 61(3): 183-203.

[9]	Levi S. The history of ultrasound in gynecology 1950-1980. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 1997; 23(4): 481-552.

[10]	Pfeifer S.M., Gosman G.G. Evaluation of adnexal masses in adolescents. Pediatr. Clin. N. Am. 1999; 46(3): 573-92.

[11]	Kratochwil A., Urban G., Friedrich F. Ultrasonic tomography of the ovaries. Ann. Chir. Gynaecol. Fenn. 1972; 61(4): 211-4.

[12]	Sassone A.M., Timor-Trish I.E., Artner A., Westhoff C., Warren W.B. Transvaginal sonographic characterization of ovarian disease: evaluation of a new scoring system to predict ovarian malignancy. Obstet. and Gynecol. 1991; 78: 70-6.

[13]	Fischerova D. Ultrasound scanning of the pelvis and abdomen for staging of gynecological tumors: a review. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 38(3): 246-66.

[14]	Трофимова Е.Ю., Новикова Е.Г., Востров А.Н. Ошибки ультразвуковой диагностики в онкогинекологии. Рос. онкол. журн. 1999; (1): 24-9.