Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ovarian cancer: the clinical role of US, CT, and MRI

  • Urogenital
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article presents an overview of ovarian cancer, which addresses the clinical roles of imaging studies, including US, CT, and MR imaging in the course of diagnosis and treatment of this important disease. US is the modality of choice in the evaluation of patients with suspected adnexal masses. Although its accuracy is not sufficient to avert surgery, morphological analysis of adnexal masses with US helps narrow the differential diagnosis, determining the degree of suspicion for malignancy, usually in concert with a serum CA-125 level. Combined morphological and vascular imaging obtained by US appear to further improve the preoperative assessment of adnexal masses. For uncertain or problematic cases, MR imaging helps to distinguish benign from malignant, with an overall accuracy for the diagnosis of malignancy of 93%. The accuracy of MR imaging in the confident diagnosis of mature cystic teratoma, endometrial cysts, and leiomayomas is very high. CT is not indicated for differential diagnosis of adnexal masses because of poor soft tissue discrimination, except for fatty tissue and for calcification, and the disadvantages of irradiation. In the staging of ovarian cancer, CT, US, and MR imaging all have a similarly high accuracy. Although it is difficult to suggest a simple algorithm for evaluating the state of women with adnexal masses, the correct preoperative diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer with the use of any of these imaging studies will lead to an appropriate referral to a specialist in gynecologic oncology and offer a significant survival advantage for patients with ovarian cancer.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1a–c
Fig. 2a–d
Fig. 3a–e
Fig. 4a–e
Fig. 5a–e
Fig. 6a–f
Fig. 7a–d
Fig. 8a–d
Fig. 9a–c
Fig. 10a–d
Fig. 11a–d
Fig. 12a–c
Fig. 13a–d
Fig. 14a, b

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society (1998) Cancer facts and figures: 1998. American Cancer Society, p 13

    Google Scholar 

  2. Morrow C, Cutin C, Paul M (1998) Synopsis of gynecologic oncology. Churchill Livingstone, New York

  3. Pecorelli S (1998) FIGO annual report on the results of treatment in gynaecological cancer, vol 23. J Epidemiol Biostatistics 3:1–135

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bohm-Velez M, Mendelson E, Bree R, Finberg H, Fishman EK, Hricak H, Laing F, Sartoris D, Thurmond A, Goldstein S (2000) Ovarian cancer screening. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria. Radiology 215:861–871

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Taylor KJ, Schwartz PE (1994) Screening for early ovarian cancer. Radiology 192:1–10

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schwartz PE, Taylor KJ (1995) Is early detection of ovarian cancer possible? Ann Med 27:519–528

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Scully RE (2000) Influence of origin of ovarian cancer on efficacy of screening. Lancet 355:1028–1029

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. NIH consensus conference (1995) Ovarian cancer: screening, treatment, and follow-up. NIH Consensus Development Panel on Ovarian Cancer. J Am Med Assoc 273:491–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jones HW III, Fleischer AC, Javitt MC, Jeffrey RB Jr (1997) Ovarian cancer. In: Fleischer AC, Javitt MC, Jeffrey RB Jr, Jones HW III (eds) Clinical gynecologic imaging. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 107–136

  10. Bohm-Velez M, Mendelson E, Bree R, Finberg H, Fishman EK, Hricak H, Laing F, Sartoris D, Thurmond A, Goldstein S (2000) Suspected adnexal masses. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria. Radiology 215:931–938

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Goldstein SR, Subramanyam B, Snyder JR, Beller U, Raghavendra BN, Beckman EM (1989) The postmenopausal cystic adnexal mass: the potential role of ultrasound in conservative management. Obstet Gynecol 73:8–10

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Levine D, Gosink BB, Wolf SI, Feldesman MR, Pretorius DH (1992) Simple adnexal cysts: the natural history in postmenopausal women. Radiology 184:653–659

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sassone AM, Timor-Tritsch IE, Artner A, Westhoff C, Warren WB (1991) Transvaginal sonographic characterization of ovarian disease: evaluation of a new scoring system to predict ovarian malignancy. Obstet Gynecol 78:70–76

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lerner JP, Timor-Tritsch IE, Federman A, Abramovich G (1994) Transvaginal ultrasonographic characterization of ovarian masses with an improved, weighted scoring system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 170:81–85

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jeong YY, Outwater EK, Kang HK (2000) Imaging evaluation of ovarian masses. RadioGraphics 20:1445–1470

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Salem S, White LM, Lai J (1994) Doppler sonography of adnexal masses: the predictive value of the pulsatility index in benign and malignant disease. Am J Roentgenol 163:1147–1150

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hamper UM, Sheth S, Abbas FM, Rosenshein NB, Aronson D, Kurman RJ (1993) Transvaginal color Doppler sonography of adnexal masses: differences in blood flow impedance in benign and malignant lesions. Am J Roentgenol 160:1225–1228

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kurtz AB, Tsimikas JV, Tempany CM, Hamper UM, Arger PH, Bree RL, Wechsler RJ, Francis IR, Kuhlman JE, Siegelman ES, Mitchell DG, Silverman SG, Brown DL, Sheth S, Coleman BG, Ellis JH, Kurman RJ, Caudry DJ, McNeil BJ (1999) Diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer: comparative values of Doppler and conventional US, CT, and MR imaging correlated with surgery and histopathologic analysis—report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 212:19–27

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Buy JN, Ghossain MA, Hugol D, Hassen K, Sciot C, Truc JB, Poitout P, Vadrot D (1996) Characterization of adnexal masses: combination of color Doppler and conventional sonography compared with spectral Doppler analysis alone and conventional sonography alone. Am J Roentgenol 166:385–393

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Twickler DM, Forte TB, Santos-Ramos R, McIntire D, Harris P, Scott D (1999) The Ovarian Tumor Index predicts risk for malignancy. Cancer 86:2280–2290

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Scoutt LM, McCarthy SM, Lange R, Bourque A, Schwartz PE (1994) MR evaluation of clinically suspected adnexal masses. J Comput Assist Tomogr 18:609–618

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schwartz LB, Panageas E, Lange R, Rizzo J, Comite F, McCarthy S (1994) Female pelvis: impact of MR imaging on treatment decisions and net cost analysis. Radiology 192:55–60

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hricak H, Chen M, Coakley FV, Kinkel K, Yu KK, Sica G, Bacchetti P, Powell CB (2000) Complex adnexal masses: detection and characterization with MR imaging—multivariate analysis. Radiology 214:39–46

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Kimura I, Tsuda Y, Yamashita K, Shibata T, Nakano Y, Konishi J, Konishi I, Mori T (1991) Endometrial cysts: diagnosis with MR imaging. Radiology 180:73–78

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Boardman LA, Peipert JF, Brody JM, Cooper AS, Sung J (1997) Endovaginal sonography for the diagnosis of upper genital tract infection. Obstet Gynecol 90:54–57

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ha HK, Lim GY, Cha ES, Lee HG, Ro HJ, Kim HS, Kim HH, Joo SW, Jee MK (1995) MR imaging of tubo-ovarian abscess. Acta Radiol 36:510–514

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Outwater EK, Siegelman ES, Kim B, Chiowanich P, Blasbalg R, Kilger A (1998) Ovarian Brenner tumors: MR imaging characteristics. Magn Reson Imaging 16:1147–1153

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Outwater EK, Huang AB, Dunton CJ, Talerman A, Capuzzi DM (1997) Papillary projections in ovarian neoplasms: appearance on MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 7:689–695

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tanaka YO, Yoshizako T, Nishida M, Yamaguchi M, Sugimura K, Itai Y (2000) Ovarian carcinoma in patients with endometriosis: MR imaging findings. Am J Roentgenol 175:1423–1430

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Troiano RN, Lazzarini KM, Scoutt LM, Lange RC, Flynn SD, McCarthy S (1997) Fibroma and fibrothecoma of the ovary: MR imaging findings. Radiology 204:795–798

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Scully RE, Young RH, Clement PB (1996) Tumors of the ovary, maldeveloped gonads, fallopian tube, and broad ligament. Atlas of tumor pathology. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington

  32. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Itoh K, Fujisawa I, Sago T, Minami S, Nakano Y, Itoh H, Torizuka K, Ozasa H (1987) Ovarian cystic teratomas: MR imaging. Radiology 162:669–673

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kido A, Togashi K, Konishi I, Kataoka ML, Koyama T, Ueda H, Fujii S, Konishi J (1999) Dermoid cysts of the ovary with malignant transformation: MR appearance. Am J Roentgenol 172:445–449

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Tanaka YO, Kurosaki Y, Nishida M, Michishita N, Kuramoto K, Itai Y, Kubo T (1994) Ovarian dysgerminoma: MR and CT appearance. J Comput Assist Tomogr 18:443–448

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yamaoka T, Togashi K, Koyama T, Ueda H, Nakai A, Fujii S, Yamabe H, Konishi J (2000) Yolk-sac tumor of the ovary: radiologic–pathologic correlation in four cases. J Comput Assist Tomogr 24:605–609

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ha HK, Baek SY, Kim SH, Kim HH, Chung EC, Yeon KM (1995) Krukenberg’s tumor of the ovary: MR imaging features. Am J Roentgenol 164:1435–1439

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Kim SH, Kim WH, Park KJ, Lee JK, Kim JS (1996) CT and MR findings of Krukenberg tumors: comparison with primary ovarian tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr 20:393–398

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Young RH, Scully RE (1994) Metastatic tumors of the ovary. In: Kurman RJ (ed) Blaustein’s pathology of the female genital tract. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 939–974

  39. Joja I, Asakawa T, Mitsumori A, Nakagawa T, Hiraki Y, Kudo T, Ando M, Akamatsu N (1998) Struma ovarii: appearance on MR images. Abdom Imaging 23:652–656

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Rieber A, Nussle K, Stohr I, Grab D, Fenchel S, Kreienberg R, Reske SN, Brambs HJ (2001) Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors with MR imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings. Am J Roentgenol 177:123–129

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Tempany CM, Zou KH, Silverman SG, Brown DL, Kurtz AB, McNeil BJ (2000) Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities—report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 215:761–767

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Forstner R, Hricak H, Occhipinti KA, Powell CB, Frankel SD, Stern JL (1995) Ovarian cancer: staging with CT and MR imaging. Radiology 197:619–626

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Meyer JI, Kennedy AW, Friedman R, Ayoub A, Zepp RC (1995) Ovarian carcinoma: value of CT in predicting success of debulking surgery. Am J Roentgenol 165:875–878

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. van der Burg ME, van Lent M, Buyse M, Kobierska A, Colombo N, Favalli G, Lacave AJ, Nardi M, Renard J, Pecorelli S (1995) The effect of debulking surgery after induction chemotherapy on the prognosis in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecological Cancer Cooperative Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. N Engl J Med 332:629–634

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hoskins WJ (1994) Epithelial ovarian carcinoma: principles of primary surgery. Gynecol Oncol 55:S91–S96

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Carney ME, Lancaster JM, Ford C, Tsodikov A, Wiggins CL (2002) A population-based study of patterns of care for ovarian cancer: Who is seen by a gynecologic oncologist and who is not? Gynecol Oncol 84:36–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Forstner R, Chen M, Hricak H (1995) Imaging of ovarian cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 5:606–613

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Young RC, Perez CA, Hoskins W (1993) Cancer of the ovary. In: De Vita VT Jr, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds) Cancer: principles and practice of oncology. Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 1226–1263

  49. Averette HE, Hoskins W, Nguyen HN, Boike G, Flessa HC, Chmiel JS, Zuber K, Karnell LH, Winchester DP (1993) National survey of ovarian carcinoma. I. A patient care evaluation study of the American College of Surgeons. Cancer 71:1629–1638

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Niloff JM, Bast RC Jr, Schaetzl EM, Knapp RC (1985) Predictive value of CA-125 antigen levels in second-look procedures for ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 151:981–986

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Friedman JB, Weiss NS (1990) Second thoughts about second-look laparotomy in advanced ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 322:1079–1082

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Podratz KC, Malkasian GD Jr, Wieand HS, Cha SS, Lee RA, Stanhope CR, Williams TJ (1988) Recurrent disease after negative second-look laparotomy in stages III and IV ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 29:274–282

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Low RN, Saleh F, Song SY, Shiftan TA, Barone RM, Lacey CG, Goldfarb PM (1999) Treated ovarian cancer: comparison of MR imaging with serum CA-125 level and physical examination—a longitudinal study. Radiology 211:519–528

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kinkel K, Ariche M, Tardivon AA, Spatz A, Castaigne D, Lhomme C, Vanel D (1997) Differentiation between recurrent tumor and benign conditions after treatment of gynecologic pelvic carcinoma: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology 204:55–63

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Nakamoto Y, Saga T, Ishimori T, Mamede M, Togashi K, Higuchi T, Mandai M, Fujii S, Sakahara H, Konishi J (2001) Clinical value of positron emission tomography with FDG for recurrent ovarian cancer. Am J Roentgenol 176:1449–1454

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements. The author thanks M.L. Kataoka for helping to prepare the list of references and for her assistance in preparing the article. The author also thanks T. Koyama, M. Kataoka, A. Kido, A. Nakai, and S. Koba for their assistance in preparing this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Imageology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Shogoin-Kawaharacho 54, Sakyo-ku, 606-8507, Kyoto, Japan

    Kaori Togashi

Authors
  1. Kaori Togashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kaori Togashi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Togashi, K. Ovarian cancer: the clinical role of US, CT, and MRI. Eur Radiol 13 (Suppl 6), L87–L104 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-1964-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-1964-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation