Open AccessManagement of ovarian cysts
Author(s) -
Knudsen Ulla Breth,
Tabor Ann,
Mosgaard Berit,
Andersen Erik Soegaard,
Kjer Jens Joergen,
HahnPedersen Suzanne,
ToftagerLarsen Kim,
Mogensen Ole
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
acta obstetricia et gynecologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.401
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1600-0412
pISSN - 0001-6349
DOI - 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00607.x
Subject(s) - medicine , ovarian cyst , cyst , pregnancy , radiology , gynecology , obstetrics , medline , ultrasound , biology , political science , law , genetics
Background. The treatment of an ovarian cyst relies on its nature, and accurate preoperative discrimination of benign and malignant cysts is therefore of crucial importance. This study was undertaken to review the literature concerning the preoperative diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cysts. Methods. Articles concerning ovarian cysts from a medline literature search during the period 1985–2003 were included in addition to articles found as references in the initial publications. Results. Different methods for discriminating between benign and malignant ovarian cysts are discussed. The diagnosis and the treatment are assessed in relation to age, menopausal status, pregnancy, and whether the cyst is presumed to be benign or malignant. In general, expectant management is the choice in premenopausal and pregnant women with non‐suspicious cysts and normal levels of CA‐125. In postmenopausal women, unilocular, anechoic cysts less than 5 cm in diameter together with a normal CA‐125 may be followed up. Operation is recommended in women with cysts larger than 5 cm and/or elevated levels of CA‐125. Women with symptoms should be operated regardless of age, menopausal status, or ultrasound findings. Conclusions. The preoperative discrimination between benign and malignant ovarian cysts is a challenge. Multimodal methods improve the results of single modalities, but we still need improved preoperative diagnostic tools. Furthermore, these methods should be validated in consecutive patient populations large enough to give a reliable estimate of the method's sensitivity and specificity.