Standardized Reporting in Gynecological Ultrasonography in India: The Need of the Hour

Gynecological ultrasonography (USG) is integral to evaluating adnexal masses, adenomyosis, endometriosis, and other pelvic pathologies. Despite advances in imaging, substantial variability in terminology and reporting persists, potentially leading to inconsistent communication and clinical decision-making. Established frameworks, including the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules (SR) for structured assessment of adnexal masses, the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model for risk prediction, Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) terminology for adenomyosis, and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classifications, serve complementary roles in description, diagnosis, risk stratification, and classification. Standardized approaches may improve diagnostic consistency and facilitate clinical communication, research, audit, education, and the development of artificial intelligence-based tools. However, implementation requires appropriate training, familiarity with standardized terminology, and integration into routine clinical workflows. Drawing parallels with the widespread adoption of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) in breast imaging, this commentary highlights the importance of broader adoption of standardized terminology and structured reporting in gynecological ultrasonography. Greater engagement of national professional societies, aligned with established international frameworks and recommendations from the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), may help promote more consistent reporting practices and enhance patient care.