Skip to main content
Log in

The CT features of ovarian cystadenofibroma and the differences between benign serous OCAFs and mucinous OCAFs

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Chinese Journal of Academic Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript



To summarize and explore computed tomography (CT) characteristics of ovarian cystadenofibromas (OCAFs) to help identify the differences in the imaging signature between serous and mucinous OCAFs.

Materials and methods

The pre-operative CT images of 66 cases of pathologically confirmed ovarian OCAFs in 54 patients were reviewed. The CT image characteristics of OCAFs with different histological types were recorded and analyzed.


The histological results showed there were 51 benign serous OCAFs, 10 benign mucinous OCAFs, and 5 borderline OCAFs. CT features, including tumor size, unilocular cystic masses, multilocular cystic masses, and an “anti-sieve” sign of a cystic–solid mass were statistically significant for differentiating between the benign serous group and mucinous OCAF group (P < 0.05). Although the incidence of trabecular and carpet-like patterns in benign mucinous OCAFs was relatively higher than that in serous OCAFs, there was no statistical difference. Due to the small sample of borderline OCAF cases in this study (n = 5), statistical analysis was not applicable in this group.


There were significant differences in the incidence of CT features between benign serous OCAFs and mucinous OCAFs in terms of tumor size, uni- and multilocular findings, and anti-sieve signs, suggesting that these CT features may have certain value in differentiating benign serous from mucinous OCAFs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability statement

We are sorry that the data cannot be shared openly, to protect study participant privacy. The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due [REASON(S) WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


  1. Kurman RJ. WHO classification of tumours of female reproductive organs. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer. 2014;4th ed: 307.

  2. Wolfe SA and Seckinger DJ. Varied anatomical types of ovarian adenofibroma. A proposed classification. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1967;99(1): 121–5.

  3. Cadron I, Amant F, Van Gorp T, et al. The management of borderlin tumours of the ovary. Curr Opin Oncol. 2006;18:488–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Virginia B, Amina L, Octavio A, et al. Serous and mucinous borderline ovarian tumors: are there real differences between these two entities? Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;153:188–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cho SM, Byun JY, Rha SE, et al. CT and MRI findings of cystadenofibromas of the ovary. Eur Radiol. 2004.;14(5):798–804.

  6. Tanaka YO, Okada S, Satoh T, et al. Ovarian serous surface papillary borderline tumors form sea anemone-like masses. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;33(3):633–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Prat J, Scully RE. Cellular fibromas and fibrosarcomas of the ovary: a comparative clinicopathologic analysis of seventeen cases. Cancer. 1981;47(11):2663–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours of the Female Reproductive Organs. International agency for researchon cancer. 5th edition. 2020.

  9. Lee DH. A case of mucinous cystadenofibroma of the ovary. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol. 2014;2014: 130530.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Bent CL, Sahdev A, Rockall AG, et al. MRI appearances of borderline ovarian tumours. Clin Radiol. 2009;64(4):430–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Talia KL, Parra-Herran C, McCluggage WG. Ovarian mucinous and seromucinous neoplasms: problematic aspects and modern diagnostic approach. Histopathology. 2022;80(2):255–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fahoum I, Brazowski E, Hershkovitz AA, et al. Tumor-to-tumor metastasis of colorectal adenocarcinoma to ovarian cystadenofibroma: a case report and review of the literature. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2020;39(3):270–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tang YZ, Liyanage S, Narayanan P, et al. The MRI features of histologically proven ovarian cystadenofibromas-an assessment of the morphological and enhancement patterns. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(1):48–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Timor-Tritsch IE, Yoon E, Monteagudo A, et al. Ultrasound and histopathologic correlation of ovarian cystadenofibromas: diagnostic value of the “shadow sign.” J Ultrasound Med. 2019;38(11):2973–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bige O, Demir A, Koyuncuoglu M, et al. Collision tumor: serous cystadenocarcinoma and dermoid cyst in the same ovary. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009;279(5):767–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim JH. Torsion of collision tumor: dermoid cyst and fibrothecoma with postmenopausal bleeding. J Menopausal Med. 2016;22(2):114–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Giarenis I, Peat D, Nieto JJ. Combined malignant ovarian tumour consisting of angiosarcoma, adenosarcoma, cystadenofibroma and granulosa cell tumour. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;28(1):121–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jung DC, Kim SH, Kim SH. MR imaging findings of ovarian cystadenofibroma and cystadenocarcinofibroma: clues for the differential diagnosis. Korean J Radiol. 2006;7(3):199–204.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Kusaka M, et al. Ovarian cystadenofibromas: characteristic magnetic resonance findings with pathologic correlation. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003;27(6):871–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Okada S, Ohaki Y, Inoue K, et al. Calcifications in mucinous and serous cystic ovarian tumors. J Nippon Med Sch. 2005;72(1):29–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


The Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province in China (Grant No. 2023-MS-352).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jingjing Lu or Zhe Wu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article, the author(s) or author(s) institutions have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

We (the authors) declare that Ethics Committee approval has been obtained, details of which can be found in the Materials and methods section as requested.

Informed consent

The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Ethics Committee of the Hospital and written informed consent was acquired from all the patients.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 848 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sun, L., Chen, X., Tian, L. et al. The CT features of ovarian cystadenofibroma and the differences between benign serous OCAFs and mucinous OCAFs. Chin J Acad Radiol 7, 130–136 (2024).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: