English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the scoring systems to differentiate between benign and malignant adnexal masses. Methods: It is a prospective study carried on 60 women at a tertiary care center. Transabdominal ultrasonography and color Doppler was done and women were followed till resolution of symptoms. Gold standard for diagnosis of adenexal masses was histopathological examination of specimen or fluid cytology. Results: Efficacy of Sassone scoring system for diagnosing malignant tumors sensitivity 75%, specificity 90.91%, positive predictive value 75%, negative predictive value 90.91% and an accuracy of 86.67%. Efficacy of De Priest scoring system sensitivity 66.67%, specificity 100%, positive predictive value 100%, negative predictive value 92.31% and an accuracy of 93.33%. Efficacy of Ferrazzi scoring system sensitivity 75%, specificity 100%, positive predictive value 100%, negative predictive value 91.67%, and an accuracy of 93.33%. Efficacy of alcazar scoring system sensitivity 100%, specificity 100%, Positive predictive value 100%, negative predictive value 100%, and an accuracy of 100%. Conclusion: Alcazar scoring system was found to be more sensitive and specific than other available scoring systems.

Evaluation of the Scoring Systems to Differentiate between Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses in a Tertiary Care Center, Pune