Outcomes following implementation of symptom triggered diagnostic testing for ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: UK is the first country to implement symptom triggered testing for suspected ovarian cancer (OC) following guidance from National Institute of Clinical Excellence in 2011. We evaluated its impact on cancer outcomes and implications on clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cohort study and we analysed data for all new urgent referrals for suspected OC from two large teaching hospitals using a prospectively collected electronic referral database, supplemented with clinical data from electronic records. We evaluated outcomes prior to (2011) and after (2013) implementation of guidance to evaluate stage shift, referrals workload and surgical procedures generated. RESULTS: Secondary care received 2185 new referrals from primary care for women with suspected gynaecological cancer in post guideline cohort. Of these, 217 women were referred for suspected OC. 90% of primary care referrals were not compliant with guidance. Following implementation of guidance, more women with OC were diagnosed through urgent referral (rapid access clinics): Almost double, 21 of the total 67 (31.34%) OCs in 2013 (post guidance) in comparison to only 11 of 69 OCs (15.94%) were diagnosed in 2011 (pre guidance) through urgent referrals, p=0.03. The predictive value of detecting cancer through rapid access clinics increased, from 4.5% to 9.6%, p=0.04; however, no stage shift was noted. Over 25% of patients underwent surgeries for non-malignant conditions in the post-guideline cohort. No increase was seen in workload of cancer clinics. CONCLUSION: Implementation of Symptom-triggered testing is challenging in clinical practice. Such testing results in more patients with OC accessing expedited care pathways leading to streamlined routes of diagnosis and care. However, current implementation does not lead to stage shift in diagnosis and may not achieve significant mortality benefit.

Ultrasound scan and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review comparing test accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Adenomyosis is a common condition that causes substantial morbidity. Until recently, the reference standard for a definitive diagnosis was histology of hysterectomy specimens. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may allow accurate non-invasive diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of these techniques. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. POPULATION: Women who had ultrasound and/or MRI, and whose results were compared with a reference standard. METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted in literature databases from database inception to 2010. The reference lists of known relevant articles were searched for further articles. Selected studies reported data on ultrasound and/or MRI with histological confirmation of diagnosis. Two reviewers independently selected articles without language restrictions, and extracted data in the form of 2 × 2 tables. We computed sensitivity and specificity for individual studies and pooled these results in a meta-analysis. We also performed meta-regression to examine how the index tests compared on diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Twenty-three articles (involving 2,312 women) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Transvaginal ultrasound had a pooled sensitivity of 72% (95% CI 65-79%), specificity of 81% (95% CI 77-85%), positive likelihood ratio of 3.7 (95% CI 2.1-6.4) and negative likelihood ratio of 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.5). MRI had a pooled sensitivity of 77% (95% CI 67-85%), specificity of 89% (95% CI 84-92%), positive likelihood ratio of 6.5 (95% CI 4.5-9.3), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.2 (95% CI 0.1-0.4). The results show that a correct diagnosis was obtained more often with MRI. CONCLUSION: Transvaginal ultrasound and MRI show high levels of accuracy for the non-invasive diagnosis of adenomyosis.