Advertisement

Zusammenfassung

In der täglichen gynäkologischen Praxis hat sich die Ultraschalldiagnostik als das primäre bildgebende Untersuchungsverfahren bei Abklärung von Symptomen, wie Unterbauchschmerzen oder Palpationsbefunden, durchgesetzt. Naheliegende Vorteile wie die geringe Belastung der Patientinnen, die unmittelbare Verfügbarkeit der Untersuchungsergebnisse, die fehlende Strahlenbelastung und relativ geringe Kosten favorisieren diese Untersuchungsverfahren im Vergleich zu Kernspin- oder Computertomografie.

Literatur

  1. Alcázar JL, Jurado M (2011) Gynecol Three-dimensional ultrasound for assessing women with gynecological cancer: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 120:340–346CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. AWMF-Leitlinien Register Nr. 032/035Google Scholar
  3. Bader W, Tunn R, Viereck V, Merz E (2004) Introital and perineal sonography in diagnosing stress urinary incontinence – possible clinical applications. Review. Ultraschall Med 25:181–190CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Buyss SS, Patridge E, PLCO Project Team, Greene MH et al (2005) Ovarian cancer screening in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovaran (PLOC) cancer screening trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193:1630–1639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A, Johnson CC, Lamerato L, Isaacs C, Reding DJ, Greenlee RT, Yokochi LA, Kessel B, Crawford ED, Church TR, Andriole GL, Weissfeld JL, Fouad MN, Chia D, O’Brien B, Ragard LR, Clapp JD, Rathmell JM, Riley TL, Hartge P, Pinsky PF, Zhu CS, Izmirlian G, Kramer BS, Miller AB, Xu JL, Prorok PC, Gohagan JK, Berg CD, PLCO Project Team (2011) Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled. Trial JAMA 305:2295–2303Google Scholar
  6. Campbell S, Bhan V, Royston P et al (1989) Transabdominal ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer. Brit Med J 299:1363–1367CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Fischerova D (2011) Ultrasound scanning of the pelvis and abdomen for staging of gynecological tumors: a review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 38:246–266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Fishman DA, Leeber C, Blank SV, Shulmann L, Singh D, Bozorgi K, Tamura R, Timor-Tritsch I, Schwartz PE (2005) The role of ultrasound evaluation in the detection of early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:1214–1222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fleischer A (2002) Sonographic assessment of the morphology and vascularity of ovarian masses. Ultrasound Quarterly 18:81–88CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Fung MF, Bryson P, Johnston M, Chambers A (2004) Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative Gynecology Cancer Disease Site Group: Screening postmenopausal women for ovarian cancer: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 26:717–728CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gatreh-Samani F, Tarzamni MK, Olad-Sahebmadarek E, Dastranj A, Afrough A (2011) Accuracy of 64-multidetector computed tomography in diagnosis of adnexal tumors. J Ovarian Res 17:15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Germer U (2007) Dopplerultraschall. In: Gynupdate. Springer Verlag, , S. 17 (Kap. 4.6)Google Scholar
  13. Germer U (2007) 3D-Ultraschall. In: Gynupdate. Springer Verlag, , S. 17 (Kap. 4.5)Google Scholar
  14. Grab D, Merz E, Prömpeler H, Eichhorn KH, Germer U, Osmers R, Strauss A, Wisser J, Dürr W (2011) Standards for ultrasound in gynecology. Ultraschall Med 32:415–417CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Henrich W, Fotopoulou C, Fuchs I (2007) Value of preoperative transvaginal sonography (TVS) in the description of tumor pattern in ovarian cancer patients: results of a prospective study. Anticancer Research 27:4289–4294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hensley ML, Robson ME, Kauff ND, Korytowsky B, Castiel M, Ostroff J, Hurley K, Hann LE, Colon J, Spriggs D (2003) Pre- and postmenopausal women undergoing screening for ovarian cancer: anxiety, risk perceptions, and quality of life. Gynecol Oncol 89:440–406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C (2011) BMJ. Identifying women with suspected ovarian cancer in primary care: derivation and validation of algorithm. BMJ 4:344Google Scholar
  18. Jacobs I, Oram D (1988) Screening for ovaran cancer. Biomed Pharmacother 42:589–596PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jacobs I, Skates S, MacDonald N et al (1999) Screening for ovarian cancer. A pilot randomised controlled trial. Lancet 353:1207–1209CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Jacobs I, Mackay J, Menon U, Skates SJ, Rosenthal AN, Fraser L (2006) Familial ovarian screening – effective or ineffective? Br J Canc 95:1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jacobs I, Menon U (2011) Can ovarian cancer screening save lives? The question remains unanswered. Obstet Gynecol 118:1209–1211CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Jurkovic D, Mavrelos D (2007) Catch me if you scan: ultrasound diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Review 30:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kinkel K, Hricak H, Lu Y, Tsuda K, Filly RA (2000) Ultrasound characterization of ovarian masses. A meta-analysis. Radiology 217:803–811CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kobayashi H, Yamada Y, Sado T, Sakata M, Yoshida S, Kawaguchi R, Kanayama S, Shigetomi H, Haruta S, Tsuji Y, Ueda S, Kitanaka T (2008) A randomized study of screening for ovarian cancer: a multicenter study in Japan. Int J Gynecol Cancer 18:414–420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Le T, Giede C, Salem S, Lefebvre G, Rosen B, Bentley J, Kupets R, Power P, Renaud MC, Bryson P, Davis DB, Lau S, Lotocki R, Senikas V, Morin L, Bly S, Butt K, Cargill YM, Denis N, Gagnon R, Hietala-Coyle MA, Lim KI, Ouellet A, Raciot MH, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (2009) Initial evaluation and referral guidelines for management of pelvic/ovarian masses. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 31:668–680CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Lim AW, Mesher D, Gentry-Maharaj A, Balogun N, Jacobs I, Menon U, Sasieni P (2012) Predictive value of symptoms for ovarian cancer: comparison of symptoms reported by questionnaire, interview, and general practitioner notes. J Natl Cancer Inst 18 104:114–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maymon R, Herman A, Ariely S, Dreazen E, Buckovsky I, Weinraub Z (2000) Three-dimensional vaginal sonography in obstetrics and gynecology. Hum Reprod Update 6:475–478CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Medeiros LR, Rosa DD, da Rosa MI, Bozzetti MC (2009) Accuracy of CA 125 in the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a quantitative systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 142:99–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R et al (2009) Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trail von Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol 10:327–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Merz E, Miric-Tesanic D, Bahlmann F, Weber G, Wellek S (1996) Sonographic size of uterus and ovaries in pre- and postmenopausal women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 7:38–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Modesitt SC, Pavlik EJ, Ueland FR, DePriest PD, Kryscio RJ, van Nagell Jr JR (2003) Risk of malignancy in unilocular ovarian cystic tumors less than 10 centimeters in diameter. Obstet Gynecol 102:594–599PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Oei AL, Massuger LF, Bulten J, Ligtenberg MJ, Hoogerbrugge N, de Hullu JA (2006) Surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary ovarian cancer is inefficient. Br J Canc 95:814–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Outwater EK, Siegelman ES, Hunt JL (2001) Ovarian teratomas: tumor types and imaging characteristics. Radiographics 21:475–490CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Paladini D, Testa A, Van Holsbeke C, Mancari R, Timmerman D, Valentin L (2009) Imaging in gynecological disease : clinical and ultrasound characteristics in fibroma and fibrothecoma of the ovary. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 34:188–195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Ricke J, Sehouli J, Hosten N, Stroszczynski C, Ricke J, Amthauer H, Rieger J, Buchmann E, Felix R et al (1999) Fat-saturated, contrast-enhanced spin-echo sequences in the magnetic resonance tomographic diagnosis of peritoneal carcinosis. Rofo 171:461–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Rufford BD, Jacobs IJ, Menon U (2007) Feasibility of screening for ovarian cancer using symptoms as a selection criteria. BJOG 114:59–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Saunders BA, Podzielinski I, Ware RA, Goodrich S, DeSimone CP, Ueland FR, Seamon L, Ubellacker J, Pavlik EJ, Kryscio RJ, van Nagell Jr. JR (2010) Risk of malignancy in sonographically confirmed septated cystic ovarian tumors. Gynecol Oncol 118:278–282CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Savelli L, de Iaco P, Ghi T, Bovicelli L, Rosati F, Cacciatore B (2004) Transvaginal sonographic appearance of peritoneal pseudocysts. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 23:284–288CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Savelli L, De Iaco P, Ceccaroni M (2005) Transvaginal sonographic features of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 26:552–557CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Savelli L, Ghi T, De Iaco P, Ceccaroni M, Venturoli S, Cacciatore B (2006) Paraovarian/paratubal cysts: comparison of transvaginal sonographic and pathological findings to establish diagnostic criteria. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 28:330–334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sharma A, Gentry-Maharaj A, Burnell M et al (2012) Assessing the malignant potential of ovarian inclusion cysts in postmenopausal women within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a prospective cohort study. BJOG 119:207–219CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Sohaib SA, Mills TD, Sahdev A et al (2005) The role of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in patients with adnexal mass. Clin Radiol 60:340–348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Sokalska A, Valentin L (2008) Changes in ultrasound morphology of the uterus and ovaries during the menopausal transition and early postmenopause: a 4-year longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 31:210–217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Tailor A, Bourne TH, Campbell S, Okokon E, Dew T, Collins WP (2006) Results from an ultrasound-based familial ovarian cancer screening clinic: a 10-year observational study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 21:378–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor A, Jurkovic D, Bourne TH et al (1997) Sonographic prediction of malignancy in adnexal masses using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 10:41–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Testa AC, Ferrandina G, Timmerman D, Savelli L, Ludovisi M, Van Holsbeke C, Malaggese M, Scambia G, Valentin L (2007) Imaging in gynecological disease : ultrasound features of metastases in the ovaries differ depending on the origin of the primary tumor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 29:505–511CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Timmermann D, Bourne TH, Taylor A et al (1999) A comparison of methods for preoperative discrimination between malignant and benign adnexal masses: the development of a new logistic regression model. Am L Obstet Gynecol 181:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Timmerman D, Valentin L, Bourne TH, Collins WP, Verrelst H, Vergote I (2000) 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 16:500–505CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Timmerman D, Ameye L, Fischerova D, Epstein E, Melis GB, Guerriero S, Van Holsbeke C, Savelli L, Fruscio R, Lissoni AA, Testa AC, Veldman J, Vergote I, Van Huffel S, Bourne T, Valentin L (2010) Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group. BMJ 341:c6839CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, Onsrud M, Kiserud T, Halvorsen T, Nustad K (1996) Evaluation of a risk of malignancy index based on serum CA125, ultrasound findings and menopausal status in the pre-operative diagnosis of pelvic masses. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 103:826–831CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Tsili AC, Tsampoulas C, Charisiadi A, Kalef-Ezra J, Dousias V, Paraskevaidis E, Efremidis SC (2008) Adnexal masses: accuracy of detection and differentiation with multidetector computed tomography. Gynecol Oncol 110:22–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Valentin L, Ameye L, Jurkovic D, Metzger U, Lecurus F, Van Huffel S, Timmermann D (2006) Which extrauterine pelvic masses are difficult to correctly classify as benign or malignant on the basis of ultrasound findings and is there a way of making a correct diagnosis? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 27:438–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Valentin L (2006) Imaging in gynecology. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynecol 20:881–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Valentin L, Hagen B, Tingulstad S, Eik-Nes S (2001) Comparison of „pattern recognition“ and logistic regression models for discrimination between benign and malignant pelvic masses: a prospective cross validation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 18:357–365CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Valentin L, Ameye L, Savelli L, Fruscio R, Leone FP, Czekierdowski A, Lissoni AA, Fischerova D, Guerriero S, Van Holsbeke C, Van Huffel S, Timmerman D (2011) Adnexal masses difficult to classify as benign or malignant using subjective assessment of gray-scale and Doppler ultrasound findings: logistic regression models do not help. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 38:456–465CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Van Holsbeke C, Domali E, Holland TK, Achten R, Testa AC, Valentin L, Jurkovic D, Moerman P, Timmerman D (2008) Imaging of gynecological disease : clinical and ultrasound characteristics of granulosa cell tumors of the ovary. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 31:450–456CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Holsbeke C, Van Calster B, Testa AC, Domali E, Lu C, Van Huffel S, Valentin L, Timmerman D (2009) Prospective internal validation of mathematical models to predict malignancy in adnexal masses: results from the international ovarian tumor analysis study. Clin Cancer Res 15:684–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Van Holsbeke C, Van Calster B, Guerriero S, Savelli L, Paladini D, Lissoni AA, Czekierdowski A, Fischerova D, Zhang J, Mestdagh G, Testa AC, Bourne T, Valentin L, Timmerman D (2010) Endometriomas: their ultrasound characteristics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 35:730–740PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Holsbeke C, Van Calster B, Bourne T, Ajossa S, Testa AC, Guerriero S, Fruscio R, Lissoni AA, Czekierdowski A, Savelli L, Van Huffel S, Valentin L, Timmerman D (2012) External validation of diagnostic models to estimate the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses. Clin Cancer Res 18:815–825CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Van Nagell J, DePriest PD, Reedy MB et al (2000) The efficiacy of transvaginal sonographic screening in asymptomatic women at risk for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 77:350–356CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Van Nagell Jr JR, Miller RW, DeSimone CP, Ueland FR, Podzielinski I, Goodrich ST, Elder JW, Huang B, Kryscio RJ, Pavlik EJ (2011) Long-term survival of women with epithelial ovarian cancer detected by ultrasonographic screening. Obstet Gynecol 118:1212–1221CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Yancik R (1993) Ovarian cancer. Age contrasts in incidence, histology, disease stage at diagnosis, and mortality. Cancer 15:517–523Google Scholar
  63. Yancik R, Ries LG, Yates JW (1986) Ovarian cancer in the elderly: an analysis of surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program data. Am J Obstet Gynecol 154:639–647CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Zurawski VR, Knapp RC, Einhorn N et al (1988) An initial analysis of preoperative serum CA 125 levels in patients with early stage ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 30:7–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ute Germer
    • 1
  1. 1.Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und GeburtshilfeCaritas-Krankenhaus St. JosefRegensburgDeutschland

Personalised recommendations