Dataset Information

Echogenic foci in thyroid nodules: diagnostic performance with combination of TIRADS and echogenic foci.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The malignancy risks of various echogenic foci in thyroid nodules are not consistent. The association between malignancy and echogenic foci and various Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TIRADS) in thyroid nodules has not been evaluated. We evaluated the malignancy probability and diagnostic performance of thyroid nodules with various echogenic foci and in combination with TIRADS.

Methods

This retrospective study was approved by Institutional Review Board. The data were retrospectively collected from January 2013 to December 2014. In total, 954 patients (mean age, 50.8 years; range, 13-86 years) with 1112 nodules were included. Using χ² test, we determined the prevalence of benign and malignant nodules among those with and without echogenic foci; we associated each of 6 echogenic foci types with benign and malignant nodules. Diagnostic performance was compared between the 6 types alone and in combination with various TIRADS.

Results

Among 1112 nodules, 390 nodules (35.1%) were found to have echogenic foci, and 722 nodules (64.9%) were not. Among nodules with echogenic foci, 254 nodules (65.1%) were malignant. The punctate echogenic foci with comet-tail artifact showed malignancy rate of 77.8% in solid and predominantly solid nodules. Our study demonstrated relatively low PPV (33.3-56.4%) in nodules with large echogenic foci without shadowing, macrocalcification, and peripheral curvilinear or eggshell echogenic foci with or without shadowing. However, when combined with high suspicion category of TIRADS, PPV increased to 50.0-90.9%.

Conclusion

Combination with TIRADS with different types of echogenic foci offer better stratification of the malignancy risk.

SUBMITTER: Ha SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6449957 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The aim was to compare the usefulness of selected thyroid sonographic risk-stratification systems in the diagnostics of nodules with indeterminate/suspicious cytology or unequivocal cytology in a population with a history of iodine deficiency. The diagnostic efficacy of ACR-TIRADS (the American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data Systems), EU-TIRADS (European Thyroid Association TIRADS), Korean-TIRADS, Kwak-TIRADS, AACE/ACE-AME-guidelines (American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/ American College of Endocrinology-Associazione Medici Endocrinologi guidelines) and ATA-guidelines (American Thyroid Association guidelines) was evaluated in 1000 nodules with determined histopathological diagnosis: 329 FLUS/AUS (10.6% cancers), 167 SFN/SHT (11.6% cancers), 44 SM (77.3% cancers), 298 BL (benign lesions), 162 MN (malignant neoplasms). The percentage of PTC (papillary thyroid carcinoma) among cancers was higher in Bethesda MN (86.4%) and SM (suspicion of malignancy) nodules (91.2%) than in FLUS/AUS (57.1%, p < 0.005) and SFN/SHT (suspicion of follicular neoplasm/ suspicion of Hürthle cell tumor) nodules (36.8%, p < 0.001). TIRADS efficacy was higher for MN (AUC: 0.827-0.874) and SM nodules (AUC: 0.775-0.851) than for FLUS/AUS (AUC: 0.655-0.701) or SFN/SHT nodules (AUC: 0.593-0.621). FLUS/AUS (follicular lesion of undetermined significance/ atypia of undetermined significance) nodules assigned to a high risk TIRADS category had malignancy risk of 25%. In the SFN/SHT subgroup none TIRADS category changed nodule's malignancy risk. EU-TIRADS and AACE/ACE-AME-guidelines would allow diagnosing the highest number of PTC, FTC (follicular thyroid carcinoma), HTC (Hürthle cell carcinoma), MTC (medullary thyroid carcinoma). The highest OR value was for Kwak-TIRADS (12.6) and Korean-TIRADS (12.0). Conclusions: TIRADS efficacy depends on the incidence of PTC among cancers. All evaluated TIRADS facilitate the selection of FLUS/AUS nodules for the surgical treatment but these systems are not efficient in the management of SFN/SHT nodules.

Project description:Simple Summary Thyroid nodules of category III in the Bethesda system do not constitute a uniform group, so it is still a challenge to produce a recommendation for the management of patients with such nodules. The aim of the study was to examine the benefits of the joint use of repeat FNA and a sonographic risk stratification system in category III nodules in relation to the kind of atypia: cytologic/nuclear vs. architectural. Our results indicate that in both kinds of these nodules, the joint evaluation of repeat FNA outcome and sonographic risk of malignancy shows better effectiveness than any of these methods separately. Such a combination allows the identification of patients with a high risk of malignancy as well as a group of patients in which surgical treatment may be safely put aside. Abstract The aim of the study was to examine the benefits of the joint use of repeat FNA (rFNA) and EU-TIRADS in category III nodules in relation to the kind of atypia: nuclear vs. architectural (denoted by AUS and FLUS respectively). The study included 127 AUS and 1739 FLUS nodules with a known category of EU-TIRADS. Repeat FNA was performed in 82 AUS and 934 FLUS nodules of which 57 and 515 were excised, respectively. AUS nodules had higher malignancy risk than FLUS nodules. EU-TIRADS showed higher accuracy for AUS nodules, the opposite to rFNA, that had higher accuracy for FLUS nodules. The combined criterion for AUS nodules (at least rFNA-V or EU-TIRADS-4) maximized sensitivity (92.3%) with acceptable specificity (70.0%); OR: 28.0. In the case of FLUS nodules, the combined criterion (rFNA-V or EU-TIRADS-5) maximized specificity (95.2%) with 57.7% sensitivity and a low percentage (13.9%) of positive nodules, OR: 27.0. In both types of nodules, the low risk category in EU-TIRADS and benign result of rFNA excluded cancer. Concluding, category III nodules with and without nuclear atypia differ in their risk of malignancy and, consequently, diagnostic criteria adopted for the evaluation of these nodules with rFNA and EU-TIRADS should be specific to AUS and FLUS nodules.