Page 39 - textbook5chapters

Ultrasonography in Gynaecological Cancers 129
52. Verleye L, Vergote I, van der Zee AG. Patterns of care in
surgery for ovarian cancer in Europe. European journal of
surgical oncology: the journal of the European Society of
Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical
Oncology. 2010;36 Suppl 1:S108-14.
53. Woo YL, Kyrgiou M, Bryant A, Everett T, Dickinson HO.
Centralisation of services for gynaecological cancers -
a Cochrane systematic review. Gynecologic oncology.
2012;126(2):286-90.
54. Valentin L, Hagen B, Tingulstad S, Eik-Nes S. Comparison
of ‘pattern recognition’ and logistic regression models
for discrimination between benign and malignant pelvic
masses: a prospective cross validation. Ultrasound
in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the
International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and
Gynecology. 2001;18(4):357-65.
55. Van Calster B, Timmerman D, Bourne T, Testa AC, Van
Holsbeke C, Domali E, et al. Discrimination between
benign and malignant adnexal masses by specialist
ultrasound examination versus serum CA-125. Journal of
the National Cancer Institute. 2007;99(22):1706-14.
56. Van Gorp T, Veldman J, Van Calster B, Cadron I, Leunen
K, Amant F, et al. Subjective assessment by ultrasound is
superior to the risk of malignancy index (RMI) or the risk of
ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) in discriminating
benign from malignant adnexal masses. European journal
of cancer. 2012;48(11):1649-56.
57. Valentin L, Jurkovic D, Van Calster B, Testa A, Van
Holsbeke C, Bourne T, et al. Adding a single CA 125
measurement to ultrasound imaging performed by an
experienced examiner does not improve preoperative
discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal
masses. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official
journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in
Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009;34(3):345-54.
58. Ameye L, Timmerman D, Valentin L, Paladini D, Zhang
J, Van Holsbeke C, et al. Clinically oriented three-step
strategy for assessment of adnexal pathology. Ultrasound
in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the
International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and
Gynecology. 2012;40(5):582-91.
59. Van Calster B, Van Hoorde K, Valentin L, Testa AC,
Fischerova D, Van Holsbeke C, et al. Evaluating the risk
of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX
model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early
and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic
tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. Bmj.
2014;349:g5920.
60. Tempany CM, Zou KH, Silverman SG, Brown DL, Kurtz
AB, McNeil BJ. Staging of advanced ovarian cancer:
comparison of imaging modalities--report from the
Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology.
2000;215(3):761-7.
61. Testa AC, Ludovisi M, Mascilini F, Di Legge A, Malaggese
M, Fagotti A, et al. Ultrasound evaluation of intra-
abdominal sites of disease to predict likelihood of
suboptimal cytoreduction in advanced ovarian cancer: a
prospective study. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology:
the official journal of the International Society of
Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2012;39(1):99-
105.
62. Fischerova D, Zikan M, Kocian R, Slama J, Dusek L,
Cibula D. Ultrasound in preoperative assessment of pelvic
and abdominal spread in patients with ovarian cancer.
Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal
of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics
and Gynecology. 2016;Epub ahead in print.
63. Spencer JA, Anderson K, Weston M, Wilkinson N, Hewitt
M. Image guided biopsy in the management of cancer of
the ovary. Cancer Imaging. 2006;6:144-7.
64. Abu-Alfa AK. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis and
gadolinium-based contrast agents. Advances in chronic
kidney disease. 2011;18(3):188-98.