Scoring systems for the evaluation of adnexal masses nature: current knowledge and clinical applications

Milan Terzic, Gulzhanat Aimagambetova, Melanie Norton, Luigi Della Corte, Alejandro Marín-Buck, Juan Francisco Lisón, Juan José Amer-Cuenca, Gabriella Zito, Simone Garzon, Salvatore Caruso, Agnese Maria Chiara Rapisarda, Antonio Cianci

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)


Adnexal masses are a common finding in women, with 20% of them developing at least one pelvic mass during their lifetime. There are more than 30 different subtypes of adnexal tumours, with multiple different subcategories, and the correct characterisation of the pelvic masses is of paramount importance to guide the correct management. On that basis, different algorithms and scoring systems have been developed to guide the clinical assessment. The first scoring system implemented into the clinical practice was the Risk of Malignancy Index, which combines ultrasound evaluation, menopausal status, and serum CA-125 levels. Today, current guidelines regarding female patients with adnexal masses include the application of International Ovarian Tumours Analysis simple rules, logistic regression model 1 (LR1) and LR2, OVERA, cancer ovarii non-invasive assessment of treating strategy, and assessment of Different Neoplasias in the adnexa. In this scenario, the choice of the scoring system for the discrimination between benign and malignant ovarian tumours can be complex when approaching patients with adnexal masses. This review aims to summarise the available evidence regarding the different scoring systems to provide a complete overview of the topic.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-8
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - Apr 29 2020


Dive into the research topics of 'Scoring systems for the evaluation of adnexal masses nature: current knowledge and clinical applications'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this