Advertisement

Fine needle aspiration biopsy indications for thyroid nodules: compare a point-based risk stratification system with a pattern-based risk stratification system

  • Jing-liang Ruan
  • Hai-yun Yang
  • Rong-bin Liu
  • Ming Liang
  • Ping Han
  • Xiao-lin XuEmail author
  • Bao-ming LuoEmail author
Head and Neck
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

We aim to compare the diagnostic performance to assess thyroid nodules and reliability for recommending fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) between American College of Radiology thyroid image reporting and data system (ACR TI-RADS) and American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines.

Methods

In total, this retrospective study included 1001 consecutive thyroid nodules in 918 patients from May 2016 to December 2017. US features of the thyroid nodules, including composition, echogenicity, shape, margins, echogenic foci, and size, were reviewed and were classified according to ACR TI-RADS and ATA guidelines, respectively. The diagnostic performance to assess thyroid nodules and reliability for recommending fine needle aspiration biopsy were compared between ACR TI-RADS and ATA guidelines.

Results

Of the 1001 thyroid nodules, 609 (60.8%) were benign and 392 (39.2%) were malignant. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy were 96.7%, 77.3%, 73.3%, 97.3%, and 84.9%, respectively, for ACR TI-RADS and 99.2%, 16.1%, 43.2%, 97.0%, and 48.7%, respectively, for ATA guidelines. AUC of ACR TI-RADS was significantly greater than ATA guidelines (0.935 (0.918, 0.949) vs 0.884 (0.862, 0.903), p < 0.001). Biopsy yield of malignancy, biopsy rate of malignancy, and unnecessary FNAB rate were 59.5%, 91.3%, and 40.5%, respectively, for ACR TI-RDS and 38.5%, 97.4%, and 61.5%, respectively, for ATA guidelines.

Conclusions

ACR TI-RADS was more accurate than ATA guidelines for differentiating malignant thyroid nodules from benign nodules and more reliable than ATA guidelines for recommending thyroid nodules for FNAB.

Key Points

Malignant risk of thyroid nodules can be stratified by ultrasound.

• American College of Radiology guidelines were more accurate for differentiating malignant thyroid nodules from benign nodules.

• American College of Radiology guidelines were more reliable for recommending thyroid nodules for biopsy.

Keywords

Fine needle aspiration biopsy Biopsy; Guidelines Thyroid nodules Ultrasound 

Abbreviations and acronyms

ACR

American College of Radiology

ATA

American Thyroid Association

AUC

Area under the curve

FNAB

Fine needle aspiration biopsy

NPV

Negative predictive value

PPV

Positive predictive value

PTC

Papillary thyroid cancer

TI-RADS

Thyroid image reporting and data system

US

Ultrasound

Notes

Funding

This study has received funding by Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2016A030313306) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (81671704).

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Prof. Bao-ming Luo.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products of services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• retrospective

• diagnostic or prognostic

• performed at one institution

References

  1. 1.
    Davies L, Welch HG (2014) Current thyroid cancer trends in the United States. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 140:317–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahn HS, Kim HJ, Welch HG (2014) Korea’s thyroid-cancer “epidemic”--screening and overdiagnosis. N Engl J Med 371:1765–1767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oda H, Miyauchi A, Ito Y et al (2017) Comparison of the costs of active surveillance and immediate surgery in the management of low-risk papillary microcarcinoma of the thyroid. Endocr J 64:59–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Griffin A, Brito JP, Bahl M, Hoang JK (2017) Applying criteria of active surveillance to low-risk papillary thyroid cancer over a decade: how many surgeries and complications can be avoided? Thyroid 27:518–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hoang JK, Middleton WD, Farjat AE et al (2018) Reduction in thyroid nodule biopsies and improved accuracy with American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System. Radiology 287:185–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shin JH, Baek JH, Chung J et al (2016) Ultrasonography diagnosis and imaging-based management of thyroid nodules: revised Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology consensus statement and recommendations. Korean J Radiol 17:370–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tessler FN, Middleton WD, Grant EG et al (2017) ACR Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS): White Paper of the ACR TI-RADS Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 14:587–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frates MC, Benson CB, Charboneau JW et al (2005) Management of thyroid nodules detected at US: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Radiology 237:794–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC et al (2016) 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American Thyroid Association Guidelines Task Force on Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer. Thyroid 26:1–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ha EJ, Moon WJ, Na DG et al (2016) A multicenter prospective validation study for the Korean Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System in patients with thyroid nodules. Korean J Radiol 17:811–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tang AL, Falciglia M, Yang H, Mark JR, Steward DL (2017) Validation of American Thyroid Association ultrasound risk assessment of thyroid nodules selected for ultrasound fine-needle aspiration. Thyroid 27:1077–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Horvath E, Silva CF, Majlis S et al (2017) Prospective validation of the ultrasound based TIRADS (Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System) classification: results in surgically resected thyroid nodules. Eur Radiol 27:2619–2628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ha SM, Ahn HS, Baek JH et al (2017) Validation of three scoring risk-stratification models for thyroid nodules. Thyroid 27:1550–1557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lubitz CC, Kong CY, McMahon PM et al (2014) Annual financial impact of well-differentiated thyroid cancer care in the United States. Cancer 120:1345–1352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kwak JY, Han KH, Yoon JH et al (2011) Thyroid imaging reporting and data system for US features of nodules: a step in establishing better stratification of cancer risk. Radiology 260:892–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leenhardt L, Erdogan MF, Hegedus L et al (2013) 2013 European thyroid association guidelines for cervical ultrasound scan and ultrasound-guided techniques in the postoperative management of patients with thyroid cancer. Eur Thyroid J 2:147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seo H, Na DG, Kim JH, Kim KW, Yoon JW (2015) Ultrasound-based risk stratification for malignancy in thyroid nodules: a four-tier categorization system. Eur Radiol 25:2153–2162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Choi YJ, Baek JH, Suh CH et al (2017) Core-needle biopsy versus repeat fine-needle aspiration for thyroid nodules initially read as atypia/follicular lesion of undetermined significance. Head Neck 39:361–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ha EJ, Na DG, Baek JH, Sung JY, Kim JH, Kang SY (2018) US fine-needle aspiration biopsy for thyroid malignancy: diagnostic performance of seven society guidelines applied to 2000 thyroid nodules. Radiology 287:893–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Middleton WD, Teefey SA, Reading CC et al (2017) Multiinstitutional analysis of thyroid nodule risk stratification using the American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:1324–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yoon JH, Lee HS, Kim EK, Moon HJ, Kwak JY (2016) Malignancy risk stratification of thyroid nodules: comparison between the Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System and the 2014 American Thyroid Association management guidelines. Radiology 278:917–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Griffin AS, Mitsky J, Rawal U, Bronner AJ, Tessler FN, Hoang JK (2018) Improved quality of thyroid ultrasound reports after implementation of the ACR thyroid imaging reporting and data system nodule lexicon and risk stratification system. J Am Coll Radiol 15:743–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tee YY, Lowe AJ, Brand CA, Judson RT (2007) Fine-needle aspiration may miss a third of all malignancy in palpable thyroid nodules: a comprehensive literature review. Ann Surg 246:714–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ultrasound, Sun Yat-sen Memorial HospitalSun Yat-sen UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Sun Yat-sen Memorial HospitalSun Yat-sen UniversityGuangzhouChina
  3. 3.Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Sun Yat-sen Memorial HospitalSun Yat-sen UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations