We have located links that may give you full text access.
EVALUATION STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Clinical limitations of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification of uterine fibroids.
International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2017 November
OBJECTIVE: To determine the reproducibility of classifying uterine fibroids using the 2011 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system.
METHODS: The present retrospective cohort study included patients presenting for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids at the Gynecology Fibroid Clinic at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA, between April 1, 2013 and April 1, 2014. Magnetic resonance imaging of fibroid uteri was performed and the images were independently reviewed by two academic gynecologists and two radiologists specializing in fibroid care. Fibroid classifications assigned by each physician were compared and the significance of the variations was graded by whether they would affect surgical planning.
RESULTS: There were 42 fibroids from 23 patients; only 6 (14%) fibroids had unanimous classification agreement. The majority (36 [86%]) had at least two unique answers and 4 (10%) fibroids had four unique classifications. Variations in classification were not associated with physician specialty. More than one-third of the classification discrepancies would have impacted surgical planning.
CONCLUSION: FIGO fibroid classification was not consistent among four fibroid specialists. The variation was clinically significant for 36% of the fibroids. Additional validation of the FIGO fibroid classification system is needed.
METHODS: The present retrospective cohort study included patients presenting for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids at the Gynecology Fibroid Clinic at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA, between April 1, 2013 and April 1, 2014. Magnetic resonance imaging of fibroid uteri was performed and the images were independently reviewed by two academic gynecologists and two radiologists specializing in fibroid care. Fibroid classifications assigned by each physician were compared and the significance of the variations was graded by whether they would affect surgical planning.
RESULTS: There were 42 fibroids from 23 patients; only 6 (14%) fibroids had unanimous classification agreement. The majority (36 [86%]) had at least two unique answers and 4 (10%) fibroids had four unique classifications. Variations in classification were not associated with physician specialty. More than one-third of the classification discrepancies would have impacted surgical planning.
CONCLUSION: FIGO fibroid classification was not consistent among four fibroid specialists. The variation was clinically significant for 36% of the fibroids. Additional validation of the FIGO fibroid classification system is needed.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app