1 |
Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T, et al. Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2008, 31(6): 681-690.
|
2 |
Bristow R, Smith A, Zhang Z, et al. Ovarian malignancy risk stratification of the adnexal mass using a multivariate index assay [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2013, 128(2): 252-259.
|
3 |
Froyman W, Landolfo C, De Cock B, et al. Risk of complications in patients with conservatively managed ovarian tumours (IOTA5): a 2-year interim analysis of a multicentre, prospective, cohort study [J]. Lancet Oncol, 2019, 20(3): 448-458.
|
4 |
Alcázar J, Pascual M, Graupera B, et al. External validation of IOTA simple descriptors and simple rules for classifying adnexal masses [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 48(3): 397-402.
|
5 |
Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J, et al. A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer [J]. Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 1990, 97(10): 922-929.
|
6 |
Timmerman D, Van Calster B, Testa A, et al. Predicting the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses based on the Simple Rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 214(4): 424-437.
|
7 |
Basha M, Refaat R, Ibrahim S, et al. Gynecology Imaging Reporting and Data System (GI-RADS): diagnostic performance and inter-reviewer agreement [J]. Eur Radiol, 2019, 29(11): 5981-5990.
|
8 |
Froyman W, Wynants L, Landolfo C, et al. Validation of the Performance of International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) methods in the diagnosis of early stage ovarian cancer in a non-screening population [J]. Diagnostics (Basel), 2017, 7(2): 32.
|
9 |
Yazbek J, Raju S, Ben-Nagi J, et al. Effect of quality of gynaecological ultrasonography on management of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a randomised controlled trial [J]. Lancet Oncol, 2008, 9(2): 124-131.
|
10 |
刘明松, 任月芳, 金燕, 等. 非妇科专业方向超声医师应用IOTA简易准则的效果 [J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2021, 18(3): 296-300.
|
11 |
Timmerman D, Ameye L, Fischerova D, et al. Simple ultrasound rules to distinguish between benign and malignant adnexal masses before surgery: prospective validation by IOTA group [J]. BMJ, 2010, 341: c6839.
|
12 |
Hidalgo J, Ros F, Aubá, M et al. Prospective external validation of IOTA three-step strategy for characterizing and classifying adnexal masses and retrospective assessment of alternative two-step strategy using simple-rules risk [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 53(5): 693-700.
|
13 |
Amor F, Vaccaro H, Alcázar J, et al. Gynecologic imaging reporting and data system: a new proposal for classifying adnexal masses on the basis of sonographic findings [J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2009, 28(3): 285-291.
|
14 |
Van Holsbeke C, Van Calster B, Testa A, et al. Prospective internal validation of mathematical models to predict malignancy in adnexal masses: results from the international ovarian tumor analysis study [J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2009, 15(2): 684-691.
|
15 |
Timmerman D, Testa A, Bourne T, et al. Logistic regression model to distinguish between the benign and malignant adnexal mass before surgery: a multicenter study by the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis Group [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2005, 23(34): 8794-8801.
|
16 |
Andreotti R, Timmerman D, Strachowski L, et al. O-RADS US risk stratification and management system: a consensus guideline from the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Committee [J]. Radiology, 2020, 294(1): 168-185.
|
17 |
Hiett AK, Sonek JD, Guy M, et al. Performance of IOTA simple rules, simple rules risk assessment, ADNEX model and O-RADS in discriminating between benign and malignant adnexal lesions in North American population [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2022, 59(5): 668-676.
|
18 |
Basha M, Metwally M, Gamil S, et al. Comparison of O-RADS, GI-RADS, and IOTA simple rules regarding malignancy rate, validity, and reliability for diagnosis of adnexal masses [J]. Eur Radiol, 2021, 31(2): 674-684.
|