Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Case Series
Editorial
How I Treat Case-Based Approach
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Original Article
Review Article
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Case Series
Editorial
How I Treat Case-Based Approach
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Original Article
Review Article
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Case Series
Editorial
How I Treat Case-Based Approach
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Original Article
Review Article
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
ARTICLE IN PRESS
doi:
10.25259/ICAJ_3_2024

Histopathological Profile and Presentation of Ovarian Tumours: An Observational Study

Department of Pathology, Sri Lakshmi Narayana Institute of Medical Sciences, Puducherry, India.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Department of Community Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Author image
Corresponding author: Sharmila Vijayan, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh, India. sharu_jipmer@yahoo.co.in
Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Balakrishnan P, Vijayan S, Kalidoss V. Histopathological Profile and Presentation of Ovarian Tumours: An Observational Study. Indian Cancer Awareness J. doi: 10.25259/ICAJ_3_2024

Abstract

Objectives:

Ovarian masses are common types of tumours in women and are an increasing cause of morbidity and mortality the world over. In reproductive-age women, most ovarian tumours are benign, whereas about 30% of tumours in postmenopausal women are malignant. These tumours can present in various clinical forms, often with vague symptoms unrelated to gynaecological issues. Ovarian tumours exhibit a wide range of histopathological patterns. Unfortunately, many ovarian tumours are asymptomatic in the early stages and are only diagnosed when they have advanced, leading to a high mortality rate. The identification of various histologic patterns of ovarian tumours is crucial for their diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. The objective of this study was to study the histopathological patterns and distribution of ovarian tumours in different age groups and their clinical presentations.

Materials and Methods:

This was a retrospective observational study done in a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India. The data pertaining to ovarian lesions received for histopathological evaluation at the pathology laboratory of a tertiary care hospital were analysed.

Results:

We analysed records of 131 cases with ovarian lesions. The results showed that 98 % of the lesions were neoplastic, while 2% were non-neoplastic. Among the neoplastic lesions, 56% were benign, 34% were malignant, and 2% were borderline malignant. The most common tumours were serous tumours, followed by mucinous tumours and germ cell tumours. The most common non-neoplastic lesions were endometriotic cysts. Benign tumours were slightly more prevalent in the reproductive age group compared to the perimenopausal age group, whereas malignant tumours were common in the age group above 40 years. Clinical presentations frequently included abdominal pain and distension. Bilateral lesions were observed in 20 cases (15%) and were mostly malignant.

Conclusion:

Benign ovarian tumours are common in both reproductive-age and perimenopausal women. The most prevalent neoplasms were surface epithelial tumours, particularly serous tumours, followed by mucinous and germ cell tumours. The most common non-neoplastic lesions were endometriotic cysts. Bilateral involvement was uncommon, with a higher occurrence on the right side.

Keywords

Clinical presentation
Histopathology
Ovarian neoplasm
Ovarian tumours

INTRODUCTION

Among gynaecological cancers, ovarian cancer ranks third, following cervical and uterine cancer.[1] It has the worst prognosis and highest mortality rate among these cancers.[2] Due to the common occurrence of ovarian tumours (both benign and malignant) in women of all age groups and the lack of an ideal screening test for early detection, there is often a delay in diagnosis, leading to increased morbidity and mortality.[3] Most patients present with advanced disease as the symptoms of ovarian cancer are often vague, including persistent abdominal pain, indigestion, abdominal bloating or distention, decreased appetite and weight loss, making diagnosis challenging.[2,3] In India, ovarian cancer is the third most common cancer in women after breast and cervical cancer, according to the National Cancer Registry Programme.[4]

Ovarian tumours are classified into different types, including surface epithelial tumours, germ cell tumours, sex cord-stromal tumours, germ cell sex cord-stromal tumours, tumours of rete ovarii and miscellaneous tumours.[5] Surface epithelial tumours are the most common. Around 90% of ovarian cancers are epithelial ovarian carcinomas, with subtypes including high-grade serous, low-grade serous, endometrioid, clear cell and mucinous carcinomas. Germ cell tumours account for <2% of ovarian cancers and are classified as teratomas, dysgerminomas, endodermal sinus tumours and choriocarcinomas. Stromal cell tumours are the least common, comprising only 1% of all cases.[6,7] The identification of various histologic patterns of ovarian tumours is crucial for their diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. The degree of differentiation of the tumours can also provide insight into the prognosis. The stage and laterality of the tumour also provide information about its nature.[6] For example, sex cord-stromal tumours are usually confined to a single ovary, while approximately 65% of metastatic tumours affect both ovaries. This study was conducted to understand the various histopathological variants of ovarian tumours among different age groups, their nature and presentation in women seeking care at a tertiary centre in Southern India.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study conducted at the Department of Pathology in a tertiary care Institute in South India. Data were collected over a period of 3 years, from 2018 to 2021. The study included all cases of ovarian neoplasms, both primary (benign and malignant) and metastatic, as well as non-neoplastic lesions. The diagnosis of ovarian tumours was based on a histopathological examination performed in the pathology department of the institution. The classification of ovarian neoplasms was based on the World Health Organization classification from 2003. Clinical data were obtained from patient records. The patients were categorised into different age groups to assess the proportion of benign and malignant tumours in each group and to determine the histological types.

RESULTS

Around 131 participants were included in the study. Most of the study participants belonged to the 20–40 years age group (52%) followed by 41–60 years (34%). Around 85% of participants had unilateral ovary lesions, and among the participants with unilateral lesions, the right side was more common than the left side. Table 1 shows the age-wise distribution and clinical profile of the study participants, and Table 2 shows the average size of the ovarian lesions. The age group had no significant difference between participants with various lesion locations. The most common symptoms among all study groups were abdominal pain. About 35% of participants with bilateral lesions had abdominal distension, which was statistically (p = 0.031) higher than unilateral lesions. A round 10 participant had other symptoms such as abnormal menstrual bleeding, pelvic pain, loss of weight and vomiting. One in four participants with bilateral lesions had ascites, and <5% of participants with unilateral lesions had ascites. These differences were statistically significant (p = 0.002). Figure 1 shows the type of ovarian tumours the study participants had. More than half of the lesions were benign (56%), and around 10% were non-neoplastic lesions.

The examination finding of the lesions is shown in Table 3. Most of the lesions were smooth, followed by nodular structure. Most unilateral lesions (Right-81% and left-73%) had a smooth surface and were solid (Right-81% and left-64%) in nature. Among the bilateral lesions, only 30% had smooth surfaces, and 40% were solid. More than half of the unilateral lesions were uniloculated, and many bilateral lesions were multiloculated. These differences in surface, nature and locules were statistically significant. Serous fluid was commonly found in the right-side unilateral lesions, and mucinous fluid was commonly found in the left-side unilateral and bilateral lesions. All participants with torsion had unilateral lesions. Around 40% of participants with bilateral lesions had deposits. More than 60% of unilateral lesions were benign, whereas 60% of bilateral lesions were malignant. The differences in type of neoplasm and presence of deposits were statistically significant. Table 4 depicts the histopathological variants of the ovarian lesions. Commonly seen lesions were serous tumours followed by mucinous tumours.

Table 1: Basic characteristics and clinical profile of study participants.
Items Sub-group Right N(%) Left N(%) Bilateral N(%) Total N(%) p-value
Age group <21 year 7 (11.9) 2 (3.8) 0 (0) 9 (6.9) 0.276
21–40 years 32 (54.2) 27 (51.9) 9 (45.0) 68 (51.9)
41–60 years 16 (27.1) 20 (38.5) 8 (40.0) 44 (33.6)
>60 years 4 (6.8) 3 (5.8) 3 (15.0) 10 (7.6)
Symptoms Abdominal pain 20 (33.9) 17 (32.7) 7 (35.0) 44 (33.6) 0.981
Abdominal mass 10 (16.9) 7 (13.5) 2 (10.0) 19 (14.5) 0.721
Abdominal distension 9 (15.3) 5 (9.6) 7 (35.0) 21 (16.0) 0.031
Others 7 (11.9) 3 (5.8) 3 (15.0) 13 (9.9) 0.401
Pregnancy Yes 0 (0) 2 (3.8) 5 (8.5) 7 (5.3) 0.286
Ascites Present 1 (1.7) 3 (5.8) 5 (25.0) 9 (6.9) 0.002

Bold values indicate Pvalue significant. P-values were calculated using the Chi-square test, p< 0.05 was considered statistically significant. N: Frequency.

Table 2: The size of the neoplastic lesions of the ovary.
Item Right Left Bilateral
Right Left
Size in cm Mean (SD) 10.6 (5.9) 12.3 (8.2) 8.6 (3.9) 7.1 (2.8)

SD: Standard deviation

Table 3: Basic characteristics of the neoplastic lesions.
Items Sub-group Right N(%) Left N(%) Bilateral N(%) Total N(%) p-value
Gross examination Smooth 48 (81.4) 38 (73.1) 6 (30.0) 92 (70.2) <0.001
Nodular 6 (10.2) 7 (13.5) 4 (20.0) 17 (13)
Congested 3 (5.1) 3 (5.8) 2 (10.0) 8 (6.1)
capsular breach 2 (3.4) 3 (5.8) 3 (15.0) 8 (6.1)
Bosselated 0 (0) 1 (1.9) 5 (25.0) 6 (4.6)
Nature Solid 48 (81.4) 33 (63.5) 8 (40.0) 89 (67.9) 0.009
Cystic 6 (10.2) 7 (13.5) 4 (20.0) 17 (13.0)
Solid and cystic 5 (8.5) 12 (23.1) 8 (40.0) 25 (19.1)
Locules Unilocular 32 (60.4) 25 (52.1) 3 (17.6) 60 (50.8) 0.006
Multilocular 21 (39.6) 23 (47.9) 14 (82.4) 58 (49.2)
Content Serous fluid 20 (33.9) 12 (23.1) 5 (25.0) 37 (28.2) 0.086
Mucinous fluid 7 (11.9) 18 (34.6) 6 (30.0) 31 (23.7)
Seromucinous fluid 7 (11.9) 3 (5.8) 0 (0) 10 (7.6)
Pultaceous material 10 (16.9) 6 (11.5) 0 (0) 16 (12.2)
Dirty fluid 5 (8.5) 2 (3.8) 2 (10) 9 (6.9)
Homogenous solid 0 (0) 3 (5.8) 1 (5.0) 4 (3.1)
Haemorrhagic 1 (1.7) 1 (1.9) 0 (0) 2 (1.5)
Deposit Present 4 (6.8) 3 (5.8) 8 (40) 15 (11.5) <0.001
Absent 55 (93.2) 49 (94.2) 12 (60.0) 116 (88.5)
Torsion Present 2 (3.4) 4 (7.7) 0 (0) 6 (4.6) 0.316
Absent 20 (100) 48 (92.3) 57 (96.6) 125 (95.4)
Type of Neoplasm Benign 36 (61.0) 33 (63.5) 4 (20.0) 73 (55.7) 0.034
Malignant 18 (30.5) 14 (26.9) 13 (65.0) 45 (34.4)
Borderline 1 (1.7) 1 (1.9) 0 (0) 2 (1.5)
Non-neoplastic 4 (6.8) 4 (7.7) 3 (15.0) 11 (8.4)

Bold values indicate P value significant. P-values were calculated using the Chi-square test, p< 0.05 was considered statistically significant. N: Frequency.

Table 4: The histopathological findings of the ovarian lesions.
Histopathology Frequency (N) Percentage (N)
Atypically proliferating mucinous tumour 2 1.5
Benign Brenner 1 0.8
Clear cell carcinoma 1 0.8
Dermoid cyst 16 12.2
Dysgerminoma 2 1.5
Endometriotic cyst 8 6.1
Fibroma 2 1.5
Fibrothecoma 2 1.5
Follicular cyst 1 0.8
Granulosa cell tumour 2 1.5
Immature teratoma 1 0.8
Metastatic adenocarcinoma 5 3.8
Mixed germ cell with predominant yolk sac 1 0.8
Mucinous cystadenocarcinoma 6 4.6
Mucinous cystadenoma 18 13.7
Seromucinous cystadenocarcinoma 3 2.3
Seromucinous cystadenoma 4 3.1
Serous cystadenocarcinoma 22 16.8
Serous cystadenofibroma 5 3.8
Serous cystadenoma 21 16.0
Sex cord stromal tumour unclassified 1 0.8
Simple serous cyst 7 5.3
Total 131 100.0
Distribution of type of neoplasm among study participants.
Figure 1: Distribution of type of neoplasm among study participants.

Table 5 shows the comparison of age and clinical profile between the types of neoplastic lesions. Many of the study participants with benign lesions were in the 20–40 years age group (56%), and participants with malignant lesions were in the 41–60 years age group (45%). The most frequent symptoms among participants, with benign (32%) and non-neoplastic lesions (82%), were abdominal pain. About 32% of participants with malignant lesions had abdominal distension, which was statistically (p = 0.031) higher than other lesions. All the participants with ascites had malignant lesions. Around 28% of malignant lesions and 6% of benign lesions were bilateral, and the differences were statistically significant.

Table 5: Comparison of basic characteristics and clinical profile between the types of neoplastic lesions.
Items Sub-group Benign N(%) Malignant/Borderline N(%) Non neoplastic N(%) p-value
Age group <21 year 5 (6.8) 4 (8.5) 0 (0) 0.061
21–40 years 41 (56.2) 17 (36.2) 10 (90.9)
41–60 years 22 (30.1) 21 (44.7) 1 (9.1)
>60 years 5 (6.8) 5 (10.6) 0 (0)
Symptoms Abdominal pain 23 (31.5) 12 (25.5) 9 (81.8) 0.002
Abdominal mass 6 (8.2) 13 (27.7) 0 (0) 0.005
Abdominal distension 6 (8.2) 15 (31.9) 0 (0) 0.001
Others 6 (8.2) 7 (14.9) 0 (0) 0.253
Pregnancy Yes 7 (9.6) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0.053
Ascites Present 0 (0) 9 (19.1) 0 (0) <0.001
Site Right 36 (49.3) 19 (40.4) 4 (36.4) 0.015
Left 33 (45.2) 15 (31.9) 4 (36.4)
Bilateral 4 (5.5) 13 (27.7) 3 (27.3)

Bold values indicate P value significant. P-values were calculated using the Chi-square test, p< 0.05 was considered statistically significant. N: Frequency.

The comparison of examination findings of the lesions is shown in Table 6. Most of the benign lesions (89%) had a smooth surface and were solid (90%) in nature. Among the malignant lesions, only 45% had smooth surfaces, and 30% were solid. About two-thirds of the malignant lesions were multiloculated, and the majority of benign and nonneoplastic lesions were uniloculated. These differences in surface, nature and locules were statistically significant. All the participants with deposits were malignant. The most common deposits were found in the peritoneum and omentum [Table 7]. The histopathological pattern of various tumours encountered during our study is shown in the microphotographs, as shown in Figures 2-8.

Table 6: Comparison of characteristics of lesion between the types of neoplastic lesions.
Items Sub-group Benign N(%) Malignant/borderline N(%) Non-neoplastic N(%) p-value
Gross Examination Smooth 65 (89.0) 21 (44.7) 6 (54.5) <0.001
Nodular 2 (2.7) 13 (27.7) 2 (18.2)
Congested 5 (6.8) 3 (27.3) 0 (0)
Capsular breach 0 (0) 8 (17.0) 0 (0)
Bosselated 1 (1.0) 5 (10.6) 0 (0)
Nature Solid 66 (90.4) 14 (29.8) 9 (81.4) <0.001
Cystic 6 (8.2) 11 (23.4) 6 (8.2)
Solid and cystic 1 (1.4) 22 (46.8) 2 (18.2)
Locules Unilocular 39 (58.2) 11 (27.5) 10 (90.9) <0.001
Multilocular 28 (41.8) 29 (72.5) 1 (9.1)
Content Serous fluid 26 (35.6) 11 (23.4) 0 (0) <0.001
Mucinous fluid 17 (23.3) 12 (25.5) 2 (18.2)
Seromucinous fluid 5 (6.8) 4 (8.5) 1 (9.1)
Pultaceous material 15 (20.5) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Dirty fluid 2 (2.7) 2 (3.8) 7 (63.6)
Homogenous solid 2 (2.7) 2 (4.3) 0 (0)
Haemorrhagic 1 (1.4) 0 (0) 1 (9.1)
Missing data 5 (6.8) 17 (36.2) 0 (0)
Deposit Present 0 (0) 15 (31.9) 0 (0) <0.001
Absent 73 (100) 32 (68.1) 11 (100)
Torsion Present 4 (5.5) 0 (0) 2 (18.2) 0.316
Absent 69 (94.5) 47 (100) 9 (81.8)

Bold values indicate P value significant. P-values were calculated using the Chi-square test, p< 0.05 was considered statistically significant. N: Frequency.

Table 7: Distribution of deposits of the malignant lesions.
Deposits Frequency (N) Percentage (%)
Tube 3 2.3
Peritoneum 8 6.1
Omentum 7 5.3
Paracolic 1 0.8
Liver 1 0.8
Skin 1 0.8
(a) Gross Photograph of mature cystic teratoma with pultaceous material and hair. (b) Photomicrograph from mature cystic teratoma showing respiratory epithelium (black arrow), mucous glands (blue arrow) and adipose tissue (yellow arrow). (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
Figure 2: (a) Gross Photograph of mature cystic teratoma with pultaceous material and hair. (b) Photomicrograph from mature cystic teratoma showing respiratory epithelium (black arrow), mucous glands (blue arrow) and adipose tissue (yellow arrow). (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
(a) Gross Photograph of solid, firm ovarian mass with torsion changes. (b) Photomicrograph showing benign spindle cells in whorling (black arrow) and fascicular pattern diagnostic of fibroma of ovary (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
Figure 3: (a) Gross Photograph of solid, firm ovarian mass with torsion changes. (b) Photomicrograph showing benign spindle cells in whorling (black arrow) and fascicular pattern diagnostic of fibroma of ovary (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
(a) Magnetic Resonance Imaging of abdomen and pelvis showing ovarian cyst with papillary structures. (b) Gross Photograph showing uniloculated ovarian cyst with large papillary excrescences (black arrow) in wall. (c) Photomicrograph showing papillary projections (black arrow) with complex hierarchial branching pattern. Papillae are lined by pleomorphic columnar cells which showed invasion at focal areas. The features are diagnostic of papillary serous cystadenocarcinoma of ovary (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
Figure 4: (a) Magnetic Resonance Imaging of abdomen and pelvis showing ovarian cyst with papillary structures. (b) Gross Photograph showing uniloculated ovarian cyst with large papillary excrescences (black arrow) in wall. (c) Photomicrograph showing papillary projections (black arrow) with complex hierarchial branching pattern. Papillae are lined by pleomorphic columnar cells which showed invasion at focal areas. The features are diagnostic of papillary serous cystadenocarcinoma of ovary (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
(a) Gross photograph showing ovarian mass with nodular external surface and solid, nodular cut surface. Multiloculated cystic areas filled with mucin seen. (b) Photomicrograph showing multiloculated cyst wall lined by mucin laden columnar epithelium exhibiting tufting, stratification, villous formation (black arrow) and nuclear atypia. Cyst was filled with mucin. There was no invasion. The features are diagnostic of atypically proliferating mucinous tumour of ovary. (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
Figure 5: (a) Gross photograph showing ovarian mass with nodular external surface and solid, nodular cut surface. Multiloculated cystic areas filled with mucin seen. (b) Photomicrograph showing multiloculated cyst wall lined by mucin laden columnar epithelium exhibiting tufting, stratification, villous formation (black arrow) and nuclear atypia. Cyst was filled with mucin. There was no invasion. The features are diagnostic of atypically proliferating mucinous tumour of ovary. (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
(a) Gross photograph showing bilateral ovarian mass with classical nodular surface and maintained shape of ovary. (b) Photomicrograph showing metastatic infiltrating signet ring cells (black arrow) in ovarian stroma.The primary was from gastric signet ring cell carcinoma. The features are diagnostic of Krukenberg tumour of ovary. (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
Figure 6: (a) Gross photograph showing bilateral ovarian mass with classical nodular surface and maintained shape of ovary. (b) Photomicrograph showing metastatic infiltrating signet ring cells (black arrow) in ovarian stroma.The primary was from gastric signet ring cell carcinoma. The features are diagnostic of Krukenberg tumour of ovary. (Haematoxylin and eosin, x1000).
Photomicrograph of dysgerminoma showing sheets and lobules of polygonal clear cells with distinct cell membrane (black arrow) and intervening stroma showing lymphocytes (Haematoxylin and Eosin, x1000).
Figure 7: Photomicrograph of dysgerminoma showing sheets and lobules of polygonal clear cells with distinct cell membrane (black arrow) and intervening stroma showing lymphocytes (Haematoxylin and Eosin, x1000).
Photomicrograph of yolk sac component of mixed germ cell tumour showing large pleomorphic tumour cells arranged in glandular pattern (yellow arrow) and extracellular large eosinophilic hyaline globules (black arrow) (Haematoxylin and eosin stain, x1000).
Figure 8: Photomicrograph of yolk sac component of mixed germ cell tumour showing large pleomorphic tumour cells arranged in glandular pattern (yellow arrow) and extracellular large eosinophilic hyaline globules (black arrow) (Haematoxylin and eosin stain, x1000).

DISCUSSION

Ovarian cancer is often referred to as a ‘silent killer’ because most patients do not experience significant symptoms until the disease has advanced.[6] The main objective of our study was to investigate the different types of ovarian tumours in terms of their histopathology, prevalence and presentation in a tertiary care institute. In our study, out of 131 cases of ovarian lesions, 56% were benign tumours, 34% were malignant, 2% were borderline, and 8% were non-neoplastic lesions. These findings were consistent with observations noted in the previous studies, which reported that benign tumours were found to be more common than malignant tumours. [7-9]

Ovarian tumours can occur at any age, including infancy and childhood, but the incidence increases with age. In our study, the majority of the study participants with benign lesions were in the 20–40 years age group (56%), while participants with malignant lesions were in the 41–60 years age group (45%). Similar studies have reported comparable findings regarding the age of presentation of ovarian cancers, with most cases of malignant ovarian tumours occurring in the age group above 40 years.[10]

In terms of tumour characteristics, the study found that more than 60% of unilateral lesions were benign, whereas 60% of bilateral lesions were malignant. Furthermore, both benign and malignant ovarian tumours, which presented as unilateral lesions, were more frequently found in the right ovary compared to the left ovary; however, the difference was not statistically significant. Bilateral involvement is known in ovarian tumours, with the likelihood varying depending on the histologic subtype. Similar results have been reported wherein a predominance of unilateral masses in both benign and malignant ovarian tumours has been observed.[11]

Surface epithelial tumours account for a significant percentage of ovarian tumours worldwide, with their malignant forms representing many ovarian cancers.[12] Histopathologically, surface epithelial tumours were the most common type of ovarian tumours in our study, followed by germ cell tumours. The most common type of malignant ovarian tumour in the present study was serous cystadenocarcinoma, followed by mucinous cystadenocarcinoma. This is in line with findings from other studies.[12,13] Among patients with benign ovarian tumours, serous cystadenoma and mucinous cystadenoma were the most common, followed by mature teratomas. Similar findings were reported in other studies as well, which observed a higher prevalence of serous cystadenoma among benign tumours and serous cystadenocarcinoma among malignant ovarian tumours. [14,15]

Germ cell tumours were the second major group of tumours in our study, and their proportion varied in other studies. Mature teratoma (Dermoid cyst) was the most common benign germ cell tumour, while dysgerminoma was the most common malignant germ cell tumour and the findings were consistent with other studies.[10,16,17]

Screening for adnexal masses can be performed through routine bimanual pelvic examinations in outpatient settings. Pelvic ultrasound detects around 90% of adnexal masses, providing information about the origin, complexity, vascularity and consistency of the tumour.[6] Tumour markers and adjunctive diagnostic techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography can aid in identifying ovarian masses and detecting metastasis. However, the definitive diagnosis is made through histopathological study.[6,7]

Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the prevalence, age distribution and histological characteristics of ovarian neoplasms aligning with previous studies and contributing to understanding of the disease.

Limitations

There are some limitations to consider in this study. First, the research was conducted as a retrospective audit of medical records, and hence, all the clinical features and presentations could not be detailed. In addition, long-term follow-up of the patients could not be done.

CONCLUSION

Various clinical factors, including the patient’s age, tumour location, dimensions and histological type, can affect the prognosis of ovarian tumours. Our study found that benign ovarian tumours were more common than malignant tumours across all age groups with malignant tumours being more common at above 40 years. Morphologically, epithelial tumours were the most frequently observed variant, particularly serous and mucinous tumours, followed by germ cell tumours. The most common non-neoplastic lesions were endometriotic cysts. Bilateral involvement was uncommon, with a higher occurrence on the right side.

Author contributions:

PP, VS and VKK: conceptualisation, design, literature search, methodology, data analysis, compilation, review and final approval of the study.

Ethical approval:

Ethical approval is not required as this is a retrospective audit of data from records.

Declaration of patient consent:

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form, the patients have given their consent for their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Conflicts of interest:

There are no conflicts of interest.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation:

The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.

Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.

References

  1. , , , , , . Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394-424.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , , , , et al. The World Ovarian Cancer Coalition Every Woman Study: Identifying Challenges and Opportunities to Improve Survival and Quality of Life. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021;31(2):238-44.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. . Key Statistics for Ovarian Cancer. . Available from: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/ovariancancer/about/key-statistics.html [Last accessed 2019 Jan 08]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. . Three Year Report of Population Based Cancer Registries 2012-14 In: National Cancer Registry Program. New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research; .
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , . WHO Classification of Tumours of Female Reproductive Organs (4th ed). Geneva: WHO; .
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , . Global Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Histological Types of Ovarian Cancers in Trinidad. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8:1058-64.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. , , , , , , et al. The Histology of Ovarian Cancer: Worldwide Distribution and Implications for International Survival Comparisons (CONCORD-2) Gynecol Oncol. 2017;144:405-13.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . Clinicopathologic Study of Malignant Ovarian Tumors: A Study of Fifty Cases. Med J DY Patil Univ. 2017;10:430-7.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. , , . Comparison of Clinical Presentation of Benign and Malignant Ovarian Tumours. J Pak Med Assoc. 2009;59:18-211.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , , , . Histologic Pattern, Bilaterality and Clinical Evaluation of 957 Ovarian Neoplasms: A 10-Year Study in a Tertiary Hospital of Eastern India. J Cancer Res Ther. 2011;7:433-7.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. , . Histologic Subtypes and Laterality of Primary Epithelial Ovarian Tumors. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;97:80-3.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , , . Distribution of Various Histopathological Types of Ovarian Tumors: A Study of 212 Cases from a Tertiary Care Center of Eastern Uttar Pradesh. J Lab Phys. 2019;11:75-81.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , . Ovarian Tumours-incidence and Distribution in a Tertiary Referral Center in South India. J Dent Med Sci. 2014;13:74-80.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. , . Histopathological study of ovarian lesions in a tertiary care center in Hyderabad, India: A Retrospective Five-year Study. Int J Sci Res. 2015;4:1745-9.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. , . Clinicopathological Study of Surface Epithelial Tumours of the Ovary: An Institutional Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:EC01-4. Indian J Gynecol Oncol 2020;18:22
    [Google Scholar]
  16. , , . Epidemiology of Ovarian Cancer: A Review. Cancer Biol Med. 2017;14:9-32.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. , . Histopathological Profile of Ovarian Tumours: A Twelve-year Institutional Experience. Muller J Med Sci Res. 2015;6:107-11.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Show Sections