Please wait a minute...
European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology  2019, Vol. 40 Issue (4): 628-633    DOI: 10.12892/ejgo4717.2019
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Is intraoperative frozen examination sufficiently reliable for ovarian tumors: 11 years experience at a single center
N.B. Tepe1, *(), Z. Bozdağ2, Ö. Balat1, M.G. Uğur1, H. Ç. Özcan1, S. Sucu1, Ö.K. Karuserci1, Ö.F. Dizibüyük2
1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Gaziantep, Gaziantep, Turkey
2 Department of Pathology, University of Gaziantep, Gaziantep, Turkey
Download:  PDF(336KB)  ( 206 ) Full text   ( 9 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  
Objectives: To demonstrate the safety of intraoperative frozen section (IFS) examination in epithelial, borderline, sex-cord stromal (SCST), and germ-cell (GCT) ovarian tumors and to report causes of misdiagnosis in IFS. Materials and Methods: Six hundred fortynine patients with ovarian masses who underwent IFS examination between January 2006 and December 2016 were evaluated retrospectively. The cases were grouped as benign, malignant, borderline, and deferred according to the IFS outcome. Cases that were deferred to permanent section were excluded from the study. According to the permanent paraffin section (PPS) results, epithelial ovarian tumor (EOT), borderline ovarian tumor (BOT), SCST, and GCT subgroups were formed in addition to benign, malignant, and borderline groupings. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the IFS were calculated for each group. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the causes of misdiagnosis in IFS. Results: The IFS results were malignant, benign, and borderline in 130, 429, and 58 cases; respectively. According to PPS outcome, 143 patients were diagnosed as malignant, 423 were benign, and 51 were borderline. Four-hundred and nine (75.74%) cases were epithelial, 70 (12.96%) cases were GCT, and 61 (11.29%) cases were in the SCST subgroup. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of IFS were 97.89%, 99.60%, 98.94%, and 99.20% in EOT, 66.67%, 95.38%, 40.0%, and 98.41% in GCT, 78.57%, 100%, 100%, and 94.0% in SCST, 78.43%, 96.82%, 68.97%, and 98.03% in borderline tumors, respectively. The most important factors causing misdiagnosis in IFS were mucinous and borderline histology (p = 0.016,OR = 2.54; p = 0.001, OR = 5.74) and tumor size larger than 10 cm (p = 0.017, OR = 2.45). Conclusions: IFS examination is an effective and reliable method for intraoperative management of ovarian tumors despite some limitations in large tumors (> 10 cm), particularly in tumors of mucinous, teratoma, and borderline histology when evaluated by non-gynecopathologists.
Key words:  Frozen section      Ovarian tumor      Epithelial tumor      Germ-cell tumor      Sex-cord stromal tumor     
Published:  10 August 2019     
*Corresponding Author(s):  N.B. TEPE     E-mail:  drneslihantepe@gmail.com

Cite this article: 

N.B. Tepe, Z. Bozdağ, Ö. Balat, M.G. Uğur, H. Ç. Özcan, S. Sucu, Ö.K. Karuserci, Ö.F. Dizibüyük. Is intraoperative frozen examination sufficiently reliable for ovarian tumors: 11 years experience at a single center. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(4): 628-633.

URL: 

https://ejgo.imrpress.com/EN/10.12892/ejgo4717.2019     OR     https://ejgo.imrpress.com/EN/Y2019/V40/I4/628

[1] Jisu Yeom, Seulki Lee, Youngsun Kim. Hypercalcemia associated with primary mucinous ovarian tumor followed by pseudomyxoma peritonei can be fatal: a case report[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2020, 41(5): 824-827.
[2] Adrius Gaurilcikas, Migle Gedgaudaite, Saulius Paskauskas, Tomas Birzietis, Daiva Vaitkiene. Unusual case of Krukenberg tumors diagnosed in early pregnancy[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2020, 41(5): 806-809.
[3] S.R Oh, J.-W. Park. Is the Risk of Malignancy Index a predictive tool for preoperative differentiation between borderline ovarian tumor and ovarian cancer?[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2020, 41(3): 368-374.
[4] T. Armeanu, R. Maftei, G. Simionescu, D. Nicolaiciuc, N. Plopa, B. Doroftei. Infertility and borderline malignant ovarian tumors: a case of successful pregnancy after fertility-preserving management of the disease[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2020, 41(2): 284-288.
[5] Y. S. Lee, J. M. Baek, E. K. Park, C. J. Kim, H. J. Lee, J. O. Kim. Expression and therapeutic potential of macrophage migration inhibitory factor and CD74 in ovarian cancer[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2020, 41(1): 65-69.
[6] Z. Xu, H. Wen, Q. Xue. Successful pregnancy achieved by in vitro fertilization after fertility-preserving treatments in an infertile woman with borderline ovarian tumor and endometrial complex atypical hyperplasia: a case report[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2020, 41(1): 126-129.
[7] L. N. Abaid, N. Zekry, A. Ronaghi, R. C. Kankus, B. H. Goldstein. Primary management of an extremely large, invasive mucinous ovarian adenocarcinoma: a case report[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(6): 1044-1046.
[8] X. Xu, L. Zheng, B. Xue, M. Yao, Y. Xu. Primary Burkitt lymphoma presenting as ovarian tumor rupture: a case report and literature review[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(5): 862-866.
[9] F. El-Sharkawy, M. Sittig, C. Nieroda, A. Sardi. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the management of recurrent mucinous cystadenoma of the ovary[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(4): 543-546.
[10] Yoshiya Miyahara, Hitomi Imafuku, Yuka Murata, Yasuhiko Ebina, Hideto Yamada. A retrospective analysis of giant ovarian tumors weighing more than 5,000 grams[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(4): 563-566.
[11] P. Tsikouras, M. Dimitraki, A. Bothou, S. Zervoudis, G. Iatrakis, D. Deuteraiou, G. Galazios, A. T. Teichmann. Primary ovarian carcinoid tumors: our experience and review of the literature[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(3): 361-367.
[12] K. Chmaj-Wierzchowska, K. Małgorzata, S. Sajdak, M. Wilczak. Serum MCP-1 (CCL2), MCP-2 (CCL8), RANTES (CCL5), KI67, TNF-β levels in patients with benign and borderline ovarian tumours[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(2): 278-283.
[13] M. Terzic, S. Terzic, J. Dotlic, M. Dokic, M. Mitrovic, G. Bapayeva, N. Arsenovic, A.S. Lagana, M. Norton. Ovarian clear cell carcinoma associated with endometriosis: a case report and literature review[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2019, 40(1): 166-169.
[14] F. Atalay, K. Cetinkaya. Epithelial borderline ovarian tumors: clinicopathological characteristics, management options, and diagnostic role of intraoperative consultation[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2018, 39(6): 988-991.
[15] Aiwen Le, Zhonghai Wang, Xiaoyun Dai, Tianhui Xiao, Rong Zhuo. Retroperitoneal teratoma misdiagnosed as ovarian tumor: a case report[J]. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology, 2018, 39(6): 1017-1021.
No Suggested Reading articles found!