A Comparative Study Of Ultrasonography And Magnetic Resonance Imaging In Detection And Analysis Of Ovarian Lesions
Keywords:
Ovarian Lesions, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Ultrasonography (USG), Hemorrhagic Lesions, CystsAbstract
Background: Ovarian lesions present an extensive spectrum of pathology, from benign cysts to malignant neoplasms, often posing diagnostic challenges, especially in resource-constrained settings. In India, ovarian cancer remains a major cause of gynecological morbidity and mortality, largely due to delayed diagnosis and limited access to advanced imaging modalities.
Objective: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting and characterizing ovarian lesions to determine their relative efficacy in differentiating benign from malignant pathology.
Methodology: A prospective observational study was conducted over 18 months (May 2023–November 2024) at Lucknow. Forty-five female patients aged 17–60 years with clinically suspected ovarian lesions underwent USG and MRI. Imaging findings were evaluated independently by blinded radiologists, and diagnoses were confirmed by histopathology or intraoperative findings. Lesions were assessed based on morphological features, vascularity, and associated findings. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were calculated, and comparative diagnostic accuracy between USG and MRI was statistically analyzed.
Results: Among the 45 cases, 36 (80%) were benign and 9 (20%) malignant. MRI demonstrated higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting malignant features such as solid components, papillary projections, ascites, and omental deposits, especially in complex and cystic lesions. While USG was effective in evaluating simple cysts and hemorrhagic lesions, it showed limitations in accurately classifying borderline and malignant lesions. Statistically significant differences were observed in diagnostic performance, favoring MRI over USG (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: MRI demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy over ultrasonography in evaluating ovarian lesions, particularly in distinguishing benign from malignant masses. Its enhanced sensitivity in detecting malignant features and better concordance with histopathology highlight its critical role in accurate, non-invasive preoperative assessment and management planning.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–49.
Chawla AA, Jadhav PN, Sahu S, Savale AS. Histopathological insights into ovarian tumors: A case series perspective. Indian J Obstet Gynecol Res. 2024;11(3):496–503.
International Agency for Research on Cancer. Cancer Tomorrow [Internet]. [cited 2024 May 13]. Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/tomorrow/en/dataviz/tables?cancers=25&single_%20unit=10000&years=2050
Siddhartha N, Nimbal V, Lamani PU, Halkude T, Kolekar P. A comparison study of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in the evaluation of ovarian lesions with an emphasis on ovarian adnexal reporting and data system. Cureus. 2025;17(5):e83858.
Debbarma T, Ray J, De A, Ray MS. A study on validity of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of uterine adnexal masses. Int J Anat Radiol Surg. 2021;10(2):RO29–35.
Neeharika C, Ravindran C. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging correlation of adnexal lesions. J Res Med Dent Sci. 2021;9(5):282–9.
Ștefan RA, Ștefan PA, Mihu CM, et al. Ultrasonography in the differentiation of endometriomas from hemorrhagic ovarian cysts: the role of texture analysis. J Pers Med. 2021;11(6):611.
Thomassin-Naggara I, Aubert E, Rockall A, Jalaguier-Coudray A, Rouzier R, Daraï E, et al. Adnexal masses: development and preliminary validation of an MR imaging scoring system. Radiology. 2013;267(2):432–43.
Sultana N, Nasrullah F, Hameedi S. Adnexal masses: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of transabdominal ultrasonography and contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the characterisation of adnexal masses. Prof Med J. 2019;26(2):202–7.
Varwatte P, Gurubharath I, Harshavardhan B, Pavithra A. Comparative study of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of adnexal lesions. Int J Contemp Med Surg Radiol. 2020;5(2):B38–43.
Prasad CV, Veeraswamy S, Muppavarapu VM. Efficacy of MRI and USG in the evaluation of adnexal mass lesions and correlation with histopathological examination. Int J Radiol Diagn Imaging. 2020;3(1):27–30.
Khan RK, Tiwari V, Vij V. Imaging evaluation of ovarian masses on sonography and MRI with histopathological correlation. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2022;20(10):1015–42.
Kumari BA, Chandra AS. Diagnosis of adnexal masses – using ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for proper management. Asian Pac J Health Sci [Internet]. 2016 Dec 30 [cited 2025 Mar 24];3(4):279–84.
Sohaib SA, Mills TD, Sahdev A, Webb JA, Vantrappen PO, Jacobs IJ, et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in patients with adnexal masses. Clin Radiol. 2005;60(3):340–8.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
