• Главная
  • NEW DAY MEDICINE
  • 11 (85) 2025
  • 113 -11 (85) 2025 - Zavkibekova T.K., Ixtiyarova G.A. - MODERN DIAGNOSTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF MRI AND CT IN BENIGN OVARIAN NEOPLASMS IN WOMEN OF REPRODUCTIVE AND MENOPAUSAL AGE

113 -11 (85) 2025 - Zavkibekova T.K., Ixtiyarova G.A. - MODERN DIAGNOSTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF MRI AND CT IN BENIGN OVARIAN NEOPLASMS IN WOMEN OF REPRODUCTIVE AND MENOPAUSAL AGE

MODERN DIAGNOSTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF MRI AND CT IN BENIGN OVARIAN NEOPLASMS IN WOMEN OF REPRODUCTIVE AND MENOPAUSAL AGE

Zavkibekova T.K. - Bukhara branch of the Republican Scientific Center for Emergency Medical Care Uzbekistan, Bukhara State Medical Institute named after Abu Ali ibn Sina

Ixtiyarova G.A. - Bukhara branch of the Republican Scientific Center for Emergency Medical Care Uzbekistan, Bukhara State Medical Institute named after Abu Ali ibn Sina

Resume

The article examines the modern diagnostic significance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) in benign ovarian neoplasms in women of reproductive and menopausal age. The role of these imaging methods in determining tumor localization, structure, size, and differential diagnosis was analyzed. The study demonstrates that the use of MRI and CT in clinical practice is important for early diagnosis, prevention of complications, and selection of optimal treatment strategies.

Keywords: ovarian tumors, MRI, CT, diagnostics, benign neoplasms, reproductive age, menopause, differential diagnosis.

First page

660

Last page

664

For citation:Zavkibekova T.K., Ixtiyarova G.A. - MODERN DIAGNOSTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF MRI AND CT IN BENIGN OVARIAN NEOPLASMS IN WOMEN OF REPRODUCTIVE AND MENOPAUSAL AGE//New Day in Medicine 11(85)2025 660-664 https://newdayworldmedicine.com/en/new_day_medicine/11-85-2025

List of References

  1. Berek JS, Hacker NF. Berek Hacker’s Gynecologic Oncology. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2021.
  2. Савельева ГМ, Сухих ГТ. Гинекология: национальное руководство. Москва: ГЭОТАР-Медиа; 2022.
  3. Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T, et al. Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;54(3):325-334. doi:10.1002/uog.20261.
  4. ESGO Guidelines for Ovarian Tumors Diagnostics and Management. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2023;33(4):561-578. doi:10.1136/ijgc-2022-004123.
  5. Sayasneh A, Ferrara L, De Cock B, et al. Evaluation of ovarian masses with ultrasound and MRI. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022;12(4):915-924. doi:10.3390/diagnostics12040915.
  6. Thomassin-Naggara I, Daraï E, Cuenod CA, et al. Diagnostic value of MRI in adnexal masses. Radiology. 2022;304(1):36-48. doi:10.1148/radiol.211845.
  7. Rockall AG, Sohaib SA, et al. Imaging of ovarian tumors. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;75:45-60. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2021.02.003.
  8. Forstner R, Cunha TM, Kinkel K, et al. ESUR recommendations for MR imaging of adnexal masses. Eur Radiol. 2020;30(8):4037-4050. doi:10.1007/s00330-020-06661-5.
  9. American College of Radiology. O-RADS MRI Risk Stratification System. J Am Coll Radiol. 2021;18(5):654-665. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2021.01.048.
  10. Радзинский ВЕ, Костин ИН. Современные возможности лучевой диагностики в гинекологии. Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2024;(2):44-51.

    file

    download