Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Insights into Imaging
Published in: Insights into Imaging 1/2016

Open Access 01-02-2016 | Pictorial Review

MR imaging of ovarian masses: classification and differential diagnosis

Authors: Pietro Valerio Foti, Giancarlo Attinà, Saveria Spadola, Rosario Caltabiano, Renato Farina, Stefano Palmucci, Giuseppe Zarbo, Rosario Zarbo, Maria D’Arrigo, Pietro Milone, Giovanni Carlo Ettorre

Published in: Insights into Imaging | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

We propose a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) guided approach to differential diagnosis of ovarian tumours based on morphological appearance.

Background

Characterization of ovarian lesions is of great importance in order to plan adequate therapeutic procedures, and may influence patient’s management. Optimal assessment of adnexal masses requires a multidisciplinary approach, based on physical examination, laboratory tests and imaging techniques. Primary ovarian tumours can be classified into three main categories according to tumour origin: epithelial, germ cell and sex cord-stromal tumours. Ovarian neoplasms may be benign, borderline or malignant. Using an imaging-guided approach based on morphological appearance, we classified adnexal masses into four main groups: unilocular cyst, multilocular cyst, cystic and solid, predominantly solid. We describe MR signal intensity features and enhancement behaviour of ovarian lesions using pathologically proven examples from our institution.

Conclusion

MRI is an essential problem-solving tool to determine the site of origin of a pelvic mass, to characterize an adnexal mass, and to detect local invasion. The main advantages of MRI are the high contrast resolution and lack of ionizing radiation exposure. Although different pathological conditions may show similar radiologic manifestations, radiologists should be aware of MRI features of ovarian lesions that may orientate differential diagnosis.

Teaching Points

• Diagnostic imaging plays a crucial role in detection, characterization and staging of adnexal masses.
• Characterization of an ovarian lesion may influence patient’s management.
• Different pathological conditions may have similar radiologic manifestations.
• Non-neoplastic lesions should always be taken into consideration.
Literature
1.
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F (2013) GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC Cancer Base No. 11. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. Available via http://​globocan.​iarc.​fr, accessed on 01/03/2015
2.
Holschneider CH, Berek JS (2000) Ovarian cancer: epidemiology, biology, and prognostic factors. Semin Surg Oncol 19(1):3–10CrossRefPubMed
3.
World Health Organization Classification of Tumours (2003) Pathology and genetics of tumours of the breast and female genital organs. IARC
4.
5.
Holcomb K, Vucetic Z, Miller MC, Knapp RC (2011) Human epididymis protein 4 offers superior specificity in the differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses in premenopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(4):358.e1–6. doi:10.​1016/​j.​ajog.​2011.​05.​017 CrossRef
6.
Bandiera E, Romani C, Specchia C, Zanotti L, Galli C, Ruggeri G et al (2011) Serum human epididymis protein 4 and risk for ovarian malignancy algorithm as new diagnostic and prognostic tools for epithelial ovarian cancer management. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 20(12):2496–506. doi:10.​1158/​1055-9965.​EPI-11-0635 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
7.
Jeong YY, Outwater EK, Kang HK (2000) Imaging evaluation of ovarian masses. Radiographics 20(5):1445–70CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
10.
Levine D, Brown DL, Andreotti RF, Benacerraf B, Benson CB, Brewster WR et al (2010) Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound. Management of asymptomatic ovarian and other adnexal cysts imaged at US Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Ultrasound Q 26(3):121–31. doi:10.​1097/​RUQ.​0b013e3181f09099​ CrossRefPubMed
11.
Lalwani N, Prasad SR, Vikram R, Shanbhogue AK, Huettner PC, Fasih N (2011) Histologic, molecular, and cytogenetic features of ovarian cancers: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Radiographics 31(3):625–46. doi:10.​1148/​rg.​313105066 CrossRefPubMed
12.
13.
Chilla B, Hauser N, Singer G, Trippel M, Froehlich JM, Kubik-Huch RA (2011) Indeterminate adnexal masses at ultrasound: effect of MRI imaging findings on diagnostic thinking and therapeutic decisions. Eur Radiol 21(6):1301–10. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-010-2018-x CrossRefPubMed
14.
Togashi K (2003) Ovarian cancer: the clinical role of US, CT, and MRI. Eur Radiol 13(Suppl 4):L87–104CrossRefPubMed
15.
Fujii S, Kakite S, Nishihara K, Kanasaki Y, Harada T, Kigawa J et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating benign from malignant ovarian lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 28(5):1149–56. doi:10.​1002/​jmri.​21575 CrossRefPubMed
16.
Katayama M, Masui T, Kobayashi S, Ito T, Sakahara H, Nozaki A et al (2002) Diffusion-weighted echo planar imaging of ovarian tumors: is it useful to measure apparent diffusion coefficients? J Comput Assist Tomogr 26(2):250–6CrossRefPubMed
17.
Thomassin-Naggara I, Daraï E, Cuenod CA, Fournier L, Toussaint I, Marsault C et al (2009) Contribution of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for predicting benignity of complex adnexal masses. Eur Radiol 19(6):1544–52. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-009-1299-4 CrossRefPubMed
18.
19.
20.
21.
Kyriazi S, Collins DJ, Morgan VA, Giles SL, de Souza NM (2010) Diffusion-weighted imaging of peritoneal disease for non invasive staging of advanced ovarian cancer. Radiographics 30(5):1269–85. doi:10.​1148/​rg.​305105073 CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zhao SH, Qiang JW, Zhang GF, Ma FH, Cai SQ, Li HM et al (2014) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for differentiating borderline from malignant epithelial tumours of the ovary: pathological correlation. Eur Radiol 24(9):2292–9. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-014-3236-4 CrossRefPubMed
23.
Soher BJ, Dale BM, Merkle EM (2007) A review of MR physics: 3T versus 1.5T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 15(3):277–90CrossRefPubMed
24.
Lavdas I, Miquel ME, McRobbie DW, Aboagye EO (2014) Comparison between diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) at 1.5 and 3 tesla: a phantom study. J Magn Reson Imaging 40(3):682–90CrossRefPubMed
25.
Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Harada M (2011) Preliminary observations and clinical value of N-acetyl resonances in ovarian tumours using in-vivo proton MR spectroscopy at 3T. Eur Radiol 21(12):2640–6CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zhang H, Zhang GF, He ZY, Li ZY, Zhang GX (2014) Prospective evaluation of 3T MRI findings for primary adnexal lesions and comparison with the final histological diagnosis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 289(2):357–64CrossRefPubMed
27.
Kishimoto K, Ito K, Awaya H, Matsunaga N, Outwater EK, Siegelman ES (2002) Paraovarian cyst: MR imaging features. Abdom Imaging 27(6):685–9CrossRefPubMed
28.
29.
Wasnik AP, Menias CO, Platt JF, Lalchandani UR, Bedi DG, Elsayes KM (2013) Multimodality imaging of ovarian cystic lesions: review with an imaging based algorithmic approach. World J Radiol 28;5(3):113–25. doi:10.​4329/​wjr.​v5.​i3.​113 CrossRef
30.
Cho SM, Byun JY, Rha SE, Jung SE, Park GS, Kim BK et al (2004) CT and MRI findings of cystadenofibromas of the ovary. Eur Radiol 14(5):798–804CrossRefPubMed
31.
Tang YZ, Liyanage S, Narayanan P, Sahdev A, Sohaib A, Singh N et al (2013) The MRI features of histologically proven ovarian cystadenofibromas-an assessment of the morphological and enhancement patterns. Eur Radiol 23(1):48–56. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-012-2568-1 CrossRefPubMed
32.
33.
Sohaib SA, Reznek RH (2007) MR imaging in ovarian cancer. Cancer Imaging 1(7 Spec No A):S119–29CrossRef
34.
Outwater EK, Siegelman ES, Hunt JL (2001) Ovarian teratomas: tumor types and imaging characteristics. Radiographics 21(2):475–90CrossRefPubMed
35.
36.
37.
38.
Brown DL, Zou KH, Tempany CM, Frates MC, Silverman SG, McNeil BJ et al (2001) Primary versus secondary ovarian malignancy: imaging findings of adnexal masses in the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group Study. Radiology 219(1):213–8CrossRefPubMed
39.
Matsuoka Y, Ohtomo K, Araki T, Kojima K, Yoshikawa W, Fuwa S (2001) MR imaging of clear cell carcinoma of the ovary. Eur Radiol 11(6):946–51CrossRefPubMed
40.
41.
Shaaban AM, Rezvani M, Elsayes KM, Baskin H Jr, Mourad A, Foster BR et al (2014) Ovarian malignant germ cell tumors: cellular classification and clinical and imaging features. Radiographics 34(3):777–801. doi:10.​1148/​rg.​343130067 CrossRefPubMed
42.
Jung SE, Rha SE, Lee JM, Park SY, Oh SN, Cho KS et al (2005) CT and MRI findings of sex cord-stromal tumor of the ovary. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185(1):207–15CrossRefPubMed
43.
Tanaka YO, Tsunoda H, Kitagawa Y, Ueno T, Yoshikawa H, Saida Y (2004) Functioning ovarian tumors: direct and indirect findings at MR imaging. Radiographics 24(Suppl 1):S147–66CrossRefPubMed
44.
Imaoka I, Wada A, Kaji Y, Hayashi T, Hayashi M, Matsuo M et al (2006) Developing an MR imaging strategy for diagnosis of ovarian masses. Radiographics 26(5):1431–48CrossRefPubMed
45.
Matsubayashi R, Matsuo Y, Doi J, Kudo S, Matsuguchi K, Sugimori H (1999) Sclerosing stromal tumor of the ovary: radiologic findings. Eur Radiol 9(7):1335–8CrossRefPubMed
46.
Jung SE, Lee JM, Rha SE, Byun JY, Jung JI, Hahn ST (2002) CT and MR imaging of ovarian tumors with emphasis on differential diagnosis. Radiographics 22(6):1305–25CrossRefPubMed
47.
48.
Metadata
Title
MR imaging of ovarian masses: classification and differential diagnosis
Authors
Pietro Valerio Foti
Giancarlo Attinà
Saveria Spadola
Rosario Caltabiano
Renato Farina
Stefano Palmucci
Giuseppe Zarbo
Rosario Zarbo
Maria D’Arrigo
Pietro Milone
Giovanni Carlo Ettorre
Publication date
01-02-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Insights into Imaging / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-015-0455-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Insights into Imaging 1/2016 Go to the issue

Report

Summary of the proceedings of the International Summit 2015: General and subspecialty radiology

Report

Pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis: role of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) and CT-guided transthoracic core lung biopsy

Review

Interventricular membranous septal aneurysm: CT and MR manifestations

Pictorial Review

CT imaging features of atrioventricular shunts: what the radiologist must know

Opinion

The new Interventional Radiology/Diagnostic Radiology dual certificate: “higher standards, better education”

Pictorial Review

Haemangioma, an uncommon cause of an extradural or intradural extramedullary mass: case series with radiological pathological correlation