Table 2.

Range of tumor size and methodology used for the assessment in the included studies.

Author	Tumor Size (cm)	Assessment
Cao et al. [16]	>2 <4	MRI or physical examination
De Vincenzo et al. [17]	>2 <4	MRI and physical examination
Deng et al. [18]	>2 <4	MRI
Guo et al. [19]	>2 <4	No data
Lanowska et al. [20]	2.1–5.0 (range)	MRI
Li et al. [6]	>2 <4	MRI, physical examination, or final pathology exam
Lintner et al. [21]	>2 <4 (55%) <2 (45%)	CT, PET-CT, or MRI
Lu et al. [22]	≥2.5 <4.0	MRI and physical examination
Marchiolè et al. [23]	≥2.9 <5.1	MRI and physical examination
Plante et al. [24]	>2 <4	MRI and physical examination
Rendòn et al. [25]	>2 <6	MRI (76%), CT (12%), physical examination (12%)
Robova et al. [26]	>2 (no data regarding maximum size)	MRI or TV-US
Salihi et al. [27]	>2 <5.2	MRI, CT or PET-CT
Tesfai et al. [28]	3.5–6.0 (range)	MRI
Vercellino et al. [29]	2.1–5.0 (range)	MRI, laparoscopic or hysteroscopic staging
Wethington et al. [8]	>2 <4	MRI, physical examination, or pathology exam
Zusterzeel et al. [30]	2.2–4.0 (range)	MRI and physical examination

MRI: magnetic resonance imaging; CT: computerized tomography; PET-CT: positron emission tomography-computerized tomography; TV-US: trans-vaginal ultrasonography.