The Utility of a Composite Index for the Evaluation of Ovarian Torsion

Abstract

Background/Purpose Ovarian torsion (OT) is a clinical diagnosis with a variable presentation. The aim of this study was to develop a practical scoring system to predict patients with OT in the pediatric population to facilitate more accurate diagnosis.

Methods A retrospective study evaluating menarchal pediatric patients (1998 to 2005) with surgically confirmed OT (n = 28) compared with patients with abdominal pain and surgically confirmed non-OT (n = 26). Histogram analysis was performed to determine threshold values and used to generate the OT composite index (OT-CI).

Results Four factors were independently associated with OT: ovarian ratio, ovarian volume, nausea, and duration of pain. Arterial and venous Doppler flows were not associated with OT. The OT-CI was more accurate than any individual factor. There were no cases of OT in patients with OT-CI scores < 3. Patients with score ≥ 3 had 100% sensitivity and 65.3% specificity. A score ≥ 5 has 100% specificity.

Conclusions The OT-CI is a practical scoring system combining clinical and radiologic findings to more accurately predict OT. An OT-CI score < 3 is strong evidence against OT in pediatric menarchal patients, which may minimize unnecessary surgical intervention. In contrast, scores ≥ 3 should be considered for surgical intervention to maximize ovarian salvage.

Keywords

ovarian - torsion - scoring system

• References

• 1 Rody A, Jackisch C, Klockenbusch W, Heinig J, Coenen-Worch V, Schneider HP. The conservative management of adnexal torsion—a case-report and review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002; 101 (1) 83-86
• 2 Bayer AI, Wiskind AK. Adnexal torsion: can the adnexa be saved?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171 (6) 1506-1510 , discussion 1510–1511
• 3 Huchon C, Fauconnier A. Adnexal torsion: a literature review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010; 150 (1) 8-12
• 4 Huchon C, Panel P, Kayem G, Schmitz T, Nguyen T, Fauconnier A. Does this woman have adnexal torsion?. Hum Reprod 2012; 27 (8) 2359-2364
• 5 Cass DL. Ovarian torsion. Semin Pediatr Surg 2005; 14 (2) 86-92
• 6 Wilkinson C, Sanderson A. Adnexal torsion — a multimodality imaging review. Clin Radiol 2012; 67 (5) 476-483
• 7 Chiou SY, Lev-Toaff AS, Masuda E, Feld RI, Bergin D. Adnexal torsion: new clinical and imaging observations by sonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26 (10) 1289-1301
• 8 Linam LE, Darolia R, Naffaa LN , et al. US findings of adnexal torsion in children and adolescents: size really does matter. Pediatr Radiol 2007; 37 (10) 1013-1019
• 9 Herter LD, Golendziner E, Flores JA, Becker Jr E, Spritzer PM. Ovarian and uterine sonography in healthy girls between 1 and 13 years old: correlation of findings with age and pubertal status. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178 (6) 1531-1536
• 10 Bouguizane S, Bibi H, Farhat Y , et al. [Adnexal torsion: a report of 135 cases]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2003; 32 (6) 535-540
• 11 Servaes S, Zurakowski D, Laufer MR, Feins N, Chow JS. Sonographic findings of ovarian torsion in children. Pediatr Radiol 2007; 37 (5) 446-451
• 12 Peña JE, Ufberg D, Cooney N, Denis AL. Usefulness of Doppler sonography in the diagnosis of ovarian torsion. Fertil Steril 2000; 73 (5) 1047-1050
• 13 Anders J. Ovarian torsion in the pediatric emergency department: making the diagnosis and the importance of advocacy. Clin Pediatr Emerg Med 2009; 10: 31-37
• 14 Huchon C, Staraci S, Fauconnier A. Adnexal torsion: a predictive score for pre-operative diagnosis. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (9) 2276-2280