Skip to main content
Download PDF

Ovarian neoplasia in adolescence: a retrospective chart review of girls with neoplastic ovarian tumors in Saudi Arabia

Journal of Ovarian Research volume 15, Article number: 105 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Ovarian neoplasia in children and adolescents is a rare tumor. The diagnosis and management of such tumors is often difficult and delayed due to non-specific symptoms and low suspicion. Surgical management that preserves fertility and ovarian function should be the goal.

Objective

This study aimed to review the clinical presentation, tumor characteristics, and management of Saudi Arabian adolescents.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted on adolescent girls aged 19 or less admitted to tow referral hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, diagnosed with adnexal mass over an 8 years’ period; patients who were older than 19 were excluded.

The data collected from patients’ charts included age, presenting symptoms, radiologic findings, type of surgery, specialist who performed the surgery, and histopathology of the tumors.

We classified patients according to age using the three WHO developmental stages: early adolescence (10–13 years old), middle adolescence (14–16 years old), and late adolescence (16–17 years old).

The statistical study used SPSS version 18.0 to determine the data’s frequency, distributions, and means (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

Results

We analyzed 164 patients, between 10 and 19 years old, admitted to two hospitals between 2009 and 2017. We found that 85% of these patients underwent surgery for adnexal mass removal, and 90.2% were symptomatic or emergency cases. The majority of our patients were post-menarche (96.95%), and were between the ages of 14 and 19. The most common surgical procedure for tumor removal was laparoscopic cystectomy (74.4%).

An adnexal mass with a solid component on ultrasound is the most commonly found indicator of malignancy. The majority of tumors were benign (32.3%). Germ cell tumors were the most common (68.7%) malignant tumor, and yolk sac tumors were the most common subgroup of germ cell tumors. When managed by a gynecologist, surgical intervention can be a successful method of preserving fertility.

Conclusions

Our results confirm that the majority of neoplastic ovarian tumors in children and adolescents are benign, and surgical intervention can be used to maintain fertility, especially when managed by a gynecologist. This is one of the largest reported series and the first from our area.

Background

Ovarian cancer is a fatal gynecologic malignancy, and due to the absence of early signs and screening regimens, it is discovered late in the illness’s clinical course. The global incidence varies. It has an age adjusted incidence of 6.3–12.1/100,000 women and is the seventh most common cancer diagnosis [1, 2]. It is reported as the fourth cause of death among women [3, 4]. There is an epidemiological variability of ovarian cancer among locations and ethnicity [5, 6]. Neoplastic ovarian tumors in children and adolescents are rare, and the reported incidence in this age group ranges from 0.9 to 2% of all tumor types [7]. Several studies have also reported an incidence of approximately 2.6 cases per 100,000 females per year in this age group [8, 9].

Although the majority of these ovarian tumors are benign, a small number (0.2%) are malignant. The malignant tumors mostly are treatable, and have high survival rates. However, these indolent malignant tumors tend to become aggressive when inadequately treated [8]. Thus, the main goal of management is to promote an excellent outcome while reducing morbidity and preserving fertility.

The data on ovarian tumor types in various parts of the world have reported that germ cell tumors predominate among children and that approximately 70% of such ovarian neoplasms occur in adolescents, with mature teratoma being the predominant type of benign tumor and dysgerminoma being the predominant type of malignant tumor [7].

A review of 2026 childhood ovarian tumors reported in studies from 1940 to 1993 found that 33% were malignant and 67% were benign. The most common childhood ovarian malignancy is dysgerminoma, which accounts for 9.5 to 11% of all childhood ovarian tumors and 24.5% of childhood ovarian malignancies [8]. It has been reported that the most common type of ovarian tumor reported has varied from place to place; however, data from Ghana showed that among a total of 67 cases, 44 (65.7%) are germ cell tumors. Burkitt lymphoma, not dysgerminoma, was the single most common malignant tumor of the ovary [10]. No study of histopathology results of ovarian neoplasia in adolescents reported in our area was found in the literature.

The treatment of ovarian neoplasia often involves monitoring the patient’s surgical success. The surgical treatment for ovarian neoplasia can be performed in two ways: either by removing the tumor alone (ovary-sparing surgery) or by removing the lesion and the entire ovary (oophorectomy). Although existing data supports ovary-sparing surgery for benign ovarian neoplasms, new research indicates that up to 50% of pediatric patients with benign tumors undergo an oophorectomy [11,12,13].

Due to the low number of cases reported in adolescents and children, both the diagnosis and management of ovarian tumors in this group pose many challenges. First, most of the reported data comes from tertiary centers, which are limited by their small sample sizes. Second, these data include a mixed population of children, adolescents, and young women, with the terms “children” and “adolescents” being used to describe a nonspecific variety of age groups ranging from birth to 21 years of age [10]. These classifications are inconsistent with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) definition of the term “adolescent;” namely, a person between 10 and 19 years old. Adolescence can be further subdivided into early adolescence (10- to 13-year age group), middle adolescence (14- to 16-year age group), and late adolescence (17- to 19-year age group) [14].

There have been no published studies looking into the findings in each group or whether they differ from early, middle, and late adolescence. There is no local data reported. Most reported data have small patient numbers (< 50). In this study, we examined cases of adolescents diagnosed with ovarian tumors who were managed and admitted in gynecology departments of two referral hospitals—King Fahad Medical City and King Khalid University Hospital—in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Results

Patient characteristics

The charts of all patients were reviewed and ensured they met the criteria for data collection. The study included all girls aged 19 or younger and admitted for ovarian mass treatment; girls above this age were excluded. In total, we collected 164 patients aged between 10 and 19 years who underwent surgeries for adnexal mass removal. These patients were around 4.9% of all patients managed in both hospitals for an ovarian mass in the study periods (more than 85% of these patients were in the applicable age group). The median age of all patients was 16.83 years. A total of 159 (96.95%) patients were post-menarche, and five (3.04%) patients were pre-menarche (Table 1).

Table 1 Demographics characteristics of patients
Full size table

Table 2 shows the distribution of tumors among the three-age group, the highest number of tumors was diagnosed in the late adolescent age group (17–21) with total of 100 (61%) cases, and the lowest is in the early adolescent (11–13) with only 12 cases. There was no difference among the three groups in regard of possibility of malignancy.

Table 2 Tumor distribution among adolescent age group
Full size table

The majority of patients were symptomatic (61%) at presentation, reporting mainly abdominal pain, and 32.3% were emergency cases presenting with torsion or rupture. The remainder of the patients were asymptomatic at presentation (Table 3), and none of the malignant tumors were an incidental finding.

Table 3 Clinical presentation and type of malignancy
Full size table

Pelvic ultrasound (US) was performed preoperatively as part of the initial work-up (Table 4). On the pelvic US, the mean tumor size was determined by measuring the longest diameter. For right-sided tumors, the mean diameter was 8.8 cm (0.3, 39.2) and for left-sided tumors, it was 10.4 cm. A significant association was not found between the size of the adnexa and malignancy histopathology. Some patients underwent further investigation by means of another imaging modality: 50 patients (30.4%) had abdominal CT scans, and 19 (11.5%) underwent magnetic resonance imaging.

Table 4 Ultrasound finding and type of tumor
Full size table

In terms of predicting the final histopathology results, complex and solid tumors have a higher relative risk for malignancy (Table 4). Among the surgical approaches utilized, conventional laparoscopy was used in 122 (74.4%) patients, single-port laparoscopy was used in 12 (7.3%) patients, and laparotomy was used in 30 (18.3%) patients. Almost all patients (163) underwent fertility-preserving surgery (> 98%). All surgical procedures were performed by gynecologic oncology or a general gynecology specialist, and the most common procedure was a unilateral cystectomy.

Of all ovarian neoplasms examined herein, 15 (9%) were malignant tumors, 49 (30%) were benign neoplasia, and 100 (61%) were functional (physiological) cysts (Table 5). The majority of cases (148 cases, 90%) were unilateral. Among the patients with unilateral tumors, there was no difference in the tumor side: 75 (50.7%) had right unilateral disease and 73 (49.3%) had left unilateral disease.

Table 5 Distribution of tumor types based on unilateral and bilateral histopathology
Full size table

Analysis of benign tumors showed that mature cystic teratoma was the most common form of benign histopathology (52.8%, n = 28), followed by serous cystadenoma (15%, n = 8), serous cystadenofibroma (15%, n = 8), mucinous cystadenoma (11.3%, n = 6), and endometrioma (5.7%, n = 3). Among malignancies, 65% of the patients with malignant tumors had stage 1 disease at diagnosis, and 85.7% of these patients received adjuvant chemotherapy.

In this cohort, germ cell tumors were the most common type of malignant tumor (56.24%, n = 9), and yolk sac tumors were the most common subgroup of germ cell tumors (37.5%, n = 6). Additionally, of all malignancy’s dysgerminoma were (12.5%, n = 2), mixed germ cell tumors (6.25%, n = 1) and other malignancies included Sertoli cell tumors (6.25%, n = 1), juvenile granulosa cell tumors (6.25%, n = 1), mucinous cystadenocarcinoma (25%, n = 4) and serous cystadenocarcinoma (6.25% n = 1).

Discussion

Ovarian tumors in adolescents’ girls represent a rare tumor with heterogeneous histopathologic entities and there are less than 50 reported cases [15]. The literature for the management and outcome of this group of patients is limited. This series represents a relatively large group of patients.

In our review, the most common presenting symptom was abdominal pain. Ninety percent of the patients were symptomatic, reporting acute or chronic abdominal pain as the most common symptom, and 32.9% of these patients were emergency cases, presenting with rupture or torsion.

Other data reported dysmenorrhea, and palpable abdominal mass as their most common symptoms [3, 10].

Clinical presentation had no significant impact on our histopathological results that are consistent with other published data [16,17,18]. The majority of our patients had unilateral disease (90%), which aligned with previous reported data [6, 9, 19]. The management of these cases’ ultrasound examinations is the initial step that showed the only significant factor correlating with malignancy risk is the presence of a solid tumor or complex component; there was no significant correlation between size and risk of malignancy that was consistent with other reports [20]. There is reported data that found a significant correlation between malignancy and tumor size where some data used 10 cm and others used a 12 cm cutoff; however, these data focused on ovarian masses in children and younger adolescent [21,22,23]. The ovarian volume or mass could be a better predictor of risk of malignancy, as previously reported [22, 24]. This could be due to problems of accuracy with tumor diameter measurements on US. The finding of a solid component on US was the most important indicator of malignancy, which was consistent with our finding [25, 26]. The need for extra imaging was limited to a small number of patients, and the US report usually recommended extra studying or there is suspicion of metastatic disease. as US imaging has high sensitivity (76%) and specificity (100%) [21].

In our series, ovarian tumors in adolescents accounted for less than 5% of all ovarian tumors, and the majority of these cases were functional ovarian cysts. Reports from China found that 5% of all ovarian tumors in china occurred in children and adolescents [27, 28]. Conversely, reports from Ghana and Nigeria showed a higher rate of ovarian tumors (8–9%) in children and adolescents [10, 29].

In looking into the distribution of the prevalence of ovarian tumors and the risk of malignancy among the three different stages of adolescence, we found that the majority of tumors occur in the late adolescent group with no difference in risk of malignancy among the three age groups.

Germ cell tumors were the most common group of neoplastic tumors in both malignant and benign tumors. Mature teratomas (52.8%) in benign tumors and, yolk sac tumors (37.5%), and dysgerminomas (12.5%) of malignant tumors. This finding is in line with the study results that Xac and Jetelina [30] proposed. Our study showed that the distribution of germ cell tumors showed that yolk sac tumors rather than dysgerminoma were the most common type of malignancy, as reported in the other studies (up to 70%) from USA and Europe [8, 9]. Other types of histopathology (Burkitt’s lymphoma) were reported in Nigeria and Ghana [10, 29].

The overall goals of management in these cases is alleviation of symptoms and/or treating the malignancy while preserving ovarian function as much as possible. These cases are usually managed by gynecologist either (general or oncology) or by surgeon (pediatric or general). One clinical study showed that the rate of ovarian preservation is significantly higher if a gynecologist performed the tumor removal surgery. Bristow [31] reported that the rate of ovarian preservation was 62.3% for patients managed by a gynecologist in contrast to 20.7% for patients managed by a pediatric surgeon. Consistent with this finding, the analysis of our series revealed that the ovarian preservation rate was above 90% for patients managed by a gynecologist only, while a similar study reported an ovarian preservation rate of only 61% when managed by gynecologist and surgeons [32]. Other studies indicated the positive correlation between preservation of the ovary when a gynecologist managed this surgery compared to a pediatric surgeon [26]. Our data investigated a relatively large group of patients (164), which is one of the largest reported series in this age group and the only data from our area.

Limitations

Ovarian tumors in children and adolescents represent a heterogeneous group of histopathological entities. This study has several limitations, the most notable of which is its retrospective nature. Specifically, there are unique challenges to data collection and research in retrospective studies. In this analysis, our results were subject to issues involving recall bias, missing data, and a lack of patient follow-up. Retrospective cohort studies require larger population sizes because some outcomes are rare and prone to misclassification bias [33].

Conclusions

Ovarian tumors in young girls and adolescents represent a heterogeneous group of histopathological entities. Although these tumors are uncommon, there is a 10% risk one could be malignant. In this study, a large sample of children and adolescents diagnosed with ovarian tumors and treated in Saudi Arabia was analyzed. Our results show that the most significant indicator of malignancy is an adnexal mass with a solid component on ultrasound rather than the tumor’s diameter alone. The highest number of tumor were in the late stage [17,18,19,20,21] and the distribution of tumor types among the three stages of adolescence is similar. The most common presenting symptom of adnexal masses was abdominal pain. Ninety percent of the patients had unilateral disease, and in this group, there was no significant difference in the incidence of tumors on the left or right side. Our data revealed a high success rate with ovarian preservation when a gynecologist managed the surgery. The distribution of germ cell tumors was different from that in cohort studies, in which yolk sac tumors were the most frequent type of malignancy. Among them, malignant ovarian masses are rare but treatable tumors, and fertility preservation efforts can be successful.

Materials and methods

Study design and data collection

We conducted a retrospective chart review of 164 adolescent females aged 10 to 19 years with adnexal masses who were managed and admitted to two different referral hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (King Fahad Medical City and King Khalid University Hospital) in the 8 years from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2017. Interviews were conducted to acquire demographic information and informed permission from all pediatric patients and their parents. The following data were collected: the age of the adolescents at the time of presentation, the patient’s clinical presentation, tumor location, ultrasonography findings, and histology. We gathered imaging reports using transabdominal ultrasonography (US). We classified patients according to their ages using the three WHO developmental stages: early adolescence (10–13-years-old), middle adolescence (14–16-years-old), and late adolescence (16–17-years-old). Each ovarian ultrasound finding was classified as simple, complicated, or solid [15]. The surgical procedure was conducted by the general gynecology or gynecology oncology team, and was done as an emergency or on an elective basis. In the instance of ovarian torsion, the initial step is to untwist the ovary; the surgeon will then determine whether to remove or preserve the ovary based on its macroscopic appearance after detorsion. Treatment methods for cystic ovarian lesions include ovarian sparing surgery (cystectomy) or laparoscopic oophorectomy [16].

Staining methods

Pathologists specializing in gynecologic pathology at both hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, analyzed tissue specimens following the WHO’s International Classification of Ovarian Tumors and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging criteria [17].

Statistical analysis

The statistical study used SPSS version 18.0 to determine the data’s frequency, distributions, and means (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

Availability of data and materials

Data are available from Lateefa Othman Aldakhil upon request and with permission of King Fahad Medical City and King Khalid University Hospital.

Abbreviations

WHO:

World Health Organization

FIGO:

International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics

US:

Pelvic Ultrasound

References

  1. Roett MA, Evans P. Ovarian cancer: an overview. Am Fam Physician. 2009;18(1):609.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hashmi AA, Hussain ZF, Bhagwani AR, Edhi MM, Faridi N, Hussain SD, et al. Clinicopathologic features of ovarian neoplasms with emphasis on borderline ovarian tumors: an institutional perspective. BMC Res Notes. 2016;9(1):1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Momenimovahed Z, Ghoncheh M, Pakzad R, Hasanpour H, Salehiniya H. Incidence and mortality of uterine cancer and relationship with human development index in the world. Cukurova Med J. 2017;42(2):233–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lowe KA, Chia VM, Taylor A, O'Malley C, Kelsh M, Mohamed M, et al. An international assessment of ovarian cancer incidence and mortality. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;130(1):107–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hunn J, Rodriguez GC. Ovarian cancer: etiology, risk factors, and epidemiology. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2012;55(1):3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Momenimovahed Z, Tiznobaik A, Taheri S, Salehiniya H. Ovarian cancer in the world: epidemiology and risk factors. Int J Women's Health. 2019;11:287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Andrés MM, Costa E, Canete A, Moreno L, Castel V. Solid ovarian tumours in childhood: a 35-year review in a single institution. Clin Transl Oncol. 2010;12(4):287–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Breen J, Denehy T, et al. Pediatricovarianmalignancies, Glob.libr.women'smed.,(ISSN: 1756–2228); 2008. https://doi.org/10.3843/GLOWM.102.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Taskinen S, Fagerholm R, Lohi J, Taskinen M. Pediatric ovarian neoplastic tumors: incidence, age at presentation, tumor markers and outcome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(4):425–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Akakpo PK, Derkyi-Kwarteng L, Quayson SE, Gyasi RK, Anim JT. Ovarian tumors in children and adolescents: a 10-yr histopathologic review in Korle-Bu teaching hospital, Ghana. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2016;35(4):333–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gonzalez DO, Cooper JN, Aldrink JH, Hewitt GD, Fallat ME, Minneci PC, et al. Variability in surgical management of benign ovarian neoplasms in children. J Pediatr Surg. 2017;52(6):944–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hermans AJ, Kluivers KB, Wijnen MH, Bulten J, Massuger LF, Coppus SF. Diagnosis and treatment of adnexal masses in children and adolescents. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(3):611–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Aziz D, Davis V, Allen L, Langer JC. Ovarian torsion in children: is oophorectomy necessary? J Pediatr Surg. 2004;39(5):750–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sacks D. Age limits and adolescents. Paediatr Child Health. 2003;8(9):577–8.

  15. Brookfield K, Cheung MC, Koniaris LG, Sola JE, Fischer AC. A population-based analysis of 1037 malignant ovarian tumors in the pediatric population. J Surg Res. 2009;156(1):45–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Grapsa D, Kairi-Vassilatou E, Kleanthis C, Dastamani C, Fillipidou A, Kondi-Pafiti A. Epithelial ovarian tumors in adolescents: a retrospective pathologic study and a critical review of the literature. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2011;24(6):386–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Song T, Choi CH, Lee Y-Y, Kim T-J, Lee J-W, Bae D-S, et al. Pediatric borderline ovarian tumors: a retrospective analysis. J Pediatr Surg. 2010;45(10):1955–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lindfors O. Primary ovarian neoplasms in infants and children. A study of 81 cases diagnosed in Finland and Sweden. Ann Chir Gynaecol Fenn Suppl. 1971;177:1–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Balan P. Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of pelvic pathology. Eur J Radiol. 2006;58(1):147–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Al Jama FE, Al Ghamdi AA, Gasim T, Al Dakhiel SA, Rahman J, Rahman MS. Ovarian tumors in children and adolescents--a clinical study of 52 patients in a university hospital. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2011;24(1):25–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Péroux E, Franchi-Abella S, Sainte-Croix D, Canale S, Gauthier F, Martelli H, et al. Ovarian tumors in children and adolescents: a series of 41 cases. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2015;96(3):273–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Papic JC, Finnell SME, Slaven JE, Billmire DF, Rescorla FJ, Leys CM. Predictors of ovarian malignancy in children: overcoming clinical barriers of ovarian preservation. J Pediatr Surg. 2014;49(1):144–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Renaud EJ, Somme S, Islam S, Cameron DB, Gates RL, Williams RF, et al. Ovarian masses in the child and adolescent: an American pediatric surgical association outcomes and evidence-based practice committee systematic review. J Pediatr Surg. 2019;54:369–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Abbas PI, Elder SC, Mehollin-Ray AR, Braverman RM, Lopez ME, Francis JA, et al. Ovarian lesion volumes as a screening tool for malignancy in adolescent ovarian tumors. J Pediatr Surg. 2015;50(11):1933–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Garel L, Dubois J, Grignon A, Filiatrault D, Van Vliet G. US of the pediatric female pelvis: a clinical perspective. Radiographics. 2001;21(6):1393–407.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Cass DL, Hawkins E, Brandt ML, Chintagumpala M, Bloss RS, Milewicz AL. Surgery for ovarian masses in infants, children, and adolescents: 102 consecutive patients treated in a 15-year period. J Pediatr Surg. 2001;36(5):693–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu H, Wang X, Lu D, Liu Z, Shi G. Ovarian masses in children and adolescents in China: analysis of 203 cases. J Ovarian Res. 2013;6:47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhang B, Zhang L, Meng G. Clinical analysis of 52 adolescent patients with ovarian masses ≥10 cm in diameter. J Int Med Res. 2021;49(8):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mohammed A, Malami SA, Calvin B, Abdullahi K. A histopathological study of ovarian neoplasms in children in a tertiary hospital of northern Nigeria. Afr J Paediatr Surg. 2010;7(2):75–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Xac MC, Jetelina KK, Jarin J, Wilson E. Benign, borderline, and malignant pediatric adnexal masses: a ten-year review. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2021;34(4):454–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Bristow RE, Nugent AC, Zahurak ML, Khouzhami V, Fox HE. Impact of surgeon specialty on ovarian-conserving surgery in young females with an adnexal mass. J Adolesc Health. 2006;39(3):411–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Berger-Chen S, Herzog TJ, Lewin SN, Burke WM, Neugut AI, Hershman DL, et al. Access to conservative surgical therapy for adolescents with benign ovarian masses. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(2 Pt 1):270–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaji AH, Schringer D, Green S. Looking through the retrospectoscope: reducing bias in emergency medicine chart review studies. Ann Emerg Med. 2014;64(3):292–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, PO box 245-634, Riyadh, 11312, Saudi Arabia

    Lateefa AlDakhil

  2. King Saud Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Asma Aljuhaimi

  3. Department of Gynecology, Women’s Specialized Hospital, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Mashael AlKhattabi & Abdulaziz Alobaid

  4. Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Saleh Alobaid

  5. Department of Surgery, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Rafif E. Mattar

Authors
  1. Lateefa AlDakhil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Asma Aljuhaimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mashael AlKhattabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Saleh Alobaid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rafif E. Mattar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Abdulaziz Alobaid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LAD concept, data analysis, statistical analysis and manuscript preparation; AAJ data acquisition, MAK data acquisition; SAO manuscript review; REM manuscript review; AAO design and manuscript editing. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lateefa AlDakhil.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

- The gynecological departments of King Fahad Medical City and King Khalid University Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, accepted this research.

- All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations (declaration of Helsinki).

- An informed general consent was obtained from each patient upon admission which includes the right to use any information from the patient’s file while maintaining its confidentiality.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

AlDakhil, L., Aljuhaimi, A., AlKhattabi, M. et al. Ovarian neoplasia in adolescence: a retrospective chart review of girls with neoplastic ovarian tumors in Saudi Arabia. J Ovarian Res 15, 105 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-022-01033-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-022-01033-w

Keywords

Journal of Ovarian Research

ISSN: 1757-2215

Contact us