Role of Intraoperative Frozen Section in the Diagnosis of Ovarian Tumors: Experience at Gujarat Cancer and Research Institute

  • Ruchi S. AroraEmail author
  • Shilpa M. Patel
  • Pariseema S. Dave
  • Bijal M. Patel
  • Chetana D. Parikh
  • Pabashi Poddar
Original Article



The surgical management of ovarian tumors depends on their correct categorization as benign, borderline or malignant. Ovarian neoplasms are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in women.


This study was undertaken to evaluate the accuracy of intraoperative frozen section in the diagnosis of various categories of ovarian neoplasms.


Intraoperative frozen section diagnosis was retrospectively evaluated in 292 patients with suspected ovarian neoplasms who underwent surgery as primary line of therapy at our institution. This was compared with the final histopathology diagnosis on paraffin sections.


In 292 patients frozen section report had a sensitivity of 100%, 65% and 96.67% for benign, borderline and malignant tumors, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 94.28%, 99.26%, and 99.42%, respectively. The overall accuracy of frozen section diagnosis was 96.2%. The majority of cases of disagreement were in the mucinous and borderline tumors.


Intraoperative frozen section has high accuracy in the diagnosis of suspected ovarian neoplasms. It is a valuable tool to guide the surgical management of these patients and should be routinely used in all major oncology centers.


Frozen section Intraoperative Ovarian tumor Borderline tumor Surgical staging 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from the individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Zanetta G, Rota S, Chiari S, Bonazzi C, Bratina G, Mangioni C. Behavior of borderline tumors with particular interest to persistence, recurrence, and progression to invasive carcinoma: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(10):2658–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wakahara F, Kikkawa F, Nawa A, Tamakoshi K, Ino K, Maeda O, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of tumor markers, sonography, and intraoperative frozen section for ovarian tumors. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2001;52(3):147–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lim FK, Yeoh CL, Chong SM, Arulkumaran S. Pre and intraoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors: how accurate are we? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;37(2):223–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Medeiros LR, Rosa DD, Edelweiss MI, Stein AT, Bozzetti MC, Zelmanowicz A, et al. Accuracy of frozen-section analysis in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a systematic quantitative review. J Gynecol Oncol. 2005;15(2):192–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cho HY, Park SH. Comparison of HE4, CA125, and risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm in the prediction of ovarian cancer in Korean Women. J Kor Med Sci. 2015;30(12):1777–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rose PG, Rubin RB, Nelson BE, Hunter RE, Reale FR. Accuracy of frozen-section (intraoperative consultation) diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;171(3):823–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Obiakor I, Maiman M, Mittal K, Awobuluyi M, DiMaio T, Demopoulos R. The accuracy of frozen section in the diagnosis of ovarian neoplasms. Gynecol Oncol. 1991;43(1):61–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ivanov S, Ivanov S, Khadzhiolov N. ovarian tumors—accuracy of frozen section diagnosis. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 2005;44(1):11–3.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ilvan S, Ramazanoglu R, Ulker Akyildiz E, Calay Z, Bese T, Oruc N. The accuracy of frozen section (intraoperative consultation) in the diagnosis of ovarian masses. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;97(2):395–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geomini P, Bremer G, Kruitwagen R, Mol BW. Diagnostic accuracy of frozen section diagnosis of the adnexal mass: a metaanalysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;96(1):1–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Slavutin L, Rotterdam H. Frozen section diagnosis of serous epithelial tumors of the ovary. Am J Diagn Obstet Gynecol. 1979;1:89–92.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Da Cunha Bastos A, Salvatore CA, Faria RM. Frozen section biopsy of ovarian neoplasms. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1983;21:103–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Twaalfhoven FC, Peters AA, Trimbos JB, Hermans J, Fleuren GJ. The accuracy of frozen section diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Gynecol Oncol. 1991;41:189–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Subbian A, Devi UK, Bafna UD. Accuracy rate of frozen section studies in ovarian cancers: a regional cancer institute experience. Indian J Cancer. 2013;50(4):302–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ratnavelu ND, Brown AP, Mallett S, Scholten RJ, Patel A, Founta C, Galaal K, Cross P, Naik R. Intraoperative frozen section analysis for the diagnosis of early stage ovarian cancer in suspicious pelvic masses. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;3:CD010360. Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Gynecologic Oncologists of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Gynecologic OncologyGujarat Cancer and Research InstituteAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations