Tumor Biology

, Volume 35, Issue 7, pp 6769–6776 | Cite as

Thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS) in the diagnostic value of thyroid nodules: a systematic review

  • Xi Wei
  • Ying Li
  • Sheng Zhang
  • Ming Gao
Research Article


This review was to assess the overall diagnostic accuracy of thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS) classification in the differentiated diagnosis of patients with thyroid nodules. The diagnostic accuracy of TI-RADS was identified by using data from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and other databases, which was from Jan 1966 to Dec 2013. Meta-analysis methods were used to obtain pooled sensitivity, specificity, negative likelihood ratio, positive likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves. A total of five studies with 7,753 thyroid nodules enrolled met the inclusion criteria in this meta-analysis. TI-RADS had a pooled sensitivity of 0.75 (95 % confidence interval 0.72–0.78) and a pooled specificity of 0.69 (95 % confidence interval 0.68–0.70). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 24.28 (95 % confidence interval 14.25–41.38). The overall area under the curve was 0.9177, and the Q* index was 0.8304. The TI-RADS classification was the accurate diagnostic technique for differentiating thyroid nodules.

Key words

TI-RADS Thyroid nodules Ultrasound Diagnostic value Meta-analysis 



This study was funded by the Tianjin Municipal Health Bureau of Science and Technology Fund (2012 KZ068). We are also grateful to R.S. for his valuable suggestion for this manuscript.

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    He, J. and W. Chen, Ed. Chinese Cancer Registry annual report 2012 by National Cancer Center & Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, Ministry of Health. Beijing: Military Medical Science, 2012.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frates MC, Benson CB, Charboneau JW, Frates MC, Benson CB, Charboneau JW, et al. Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Radiology. 2005;237:794–800.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gharib H, Papini E, Paschke R, Duick DS, Valcavi R, Hegedüs L, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Associazione Medici Endocrinologi, and European Thyroid Association medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules. Endocr Pract. 2010;16:468–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morris LF, Ragavendra N, Yeh M. Evidence-based assessment of the role of ultrasonography in the management of benign thyroid nodules. World J Surg. 2008;32:1253–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moon WJ, Jung SL, Lee JH, Na DG, Baek JH, Lee YH, et al. Benign and malignant thyroid nodules: US differentiation—multicenter retrospective study. Radiology. 2008;247:762–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCoy KL, Jabbour N, Ogilvie JB, Ohori NP, Carty SE, Yim JH. The incidence of cancer and rate of false-negative cytology in thyroid nodules greater than or equal to 4 cm in size. Surgery. 2007;142:837–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    American College of Radiology. BI-RADS: ultrasound. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas (BI-RADS Atlas). Reston: American College of Radiology; 2003. p. 1–14.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lazarus E, Mainiero MB, Schepps B, Koelliker SL, Livingston LS. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value. Radiology. 2006;239:385–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Park JY, Lee HJ, Jang HW, Kim HK, Yi JH, Lee W, et al. A proposal for a thyroid imaging reporting and data system for ultrasound features of thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid. 2009;19:1257–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horvath E, Majlis S, Rossi R, Franco C, Niedmann JP, Castro A, et al. An ultrasonogram reporting system for thyroid nodules stratifying cancer risk for clinical management. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:1748–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kwak JY, Han KH, Yoon JH, Moon HJ, Son EJ, Park SH, et al. Thyroid imaging reporting and data system for US features of nodules: a step in establishing better stratification of cancer risk. Radiology. 2011;260:892–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. The Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions 4.2.6. Chichester: Wiley; 2006.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:25.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dinnes J, Deeks J, Kirby J, Roderick P. A methodological review of how heterogeneity has been examined in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Health Technol Assess. 2005;9:1–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med. 1993;12:1293–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ma BY, Parajuly SS, Peng YL, Shi YY. The value of sonography in thyroid imaging reporting and data system for thyroid nodule. Chin J Bases Clin Gen Surg. 2011;18:898–901. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhou XD, Yang LX, Zhen YH. Diagnosis value of improved TI-RADS with the UE in thyroid nodules. J Yanan Univ. 2011;9:19–21. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang XR, Wang XT, Wang R. Evaluation of color Doppler ultrasound combined with TI-RADS in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant thyroid nodules. J Nantong Univ. 2012;32:495–7. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lou J, Zhao LF, Zhang L, Bao LY, Lei ZK. The value of TI-RADS in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant thyroid lesions. Clin Educ Gen Pract. 2012;10:651–3. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xie YF, Liu N, Dai YJ. TI-RADS classification system in thyroid nodules: a pilot study. Med Lab Sci. 2013;9:117. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen XK, Chen SH, Lu GR. The applicational value of TI-RADS ultrasonographic stratification in diagnosing thyroid nodules. Chin J Ultrasound Med. 2012;28:1066–8. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lu XB, Geng ZS, Liu Y. TI-RADS in the diagnosis of thyroid nodules. J Zhengzhou Univ. 2013;48:277–8. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Russ G, Royer B, Bigorgne C, Rouxel A, Bienvenu-Perrard M, Leenhardt L. Prospective evaluation of thyroid imaging reporting and data system on 4550 nodules with and without elastography. Eur J Endocrinol. 2013;168:649–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cheng SP, Lee JJ, Lin JL, Chuang SM, Chien MN, Liu CL. Characterization of thyroid nodules using the proposed thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS). Head Neck. 2013;35:541–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wang JM, Wang Y. The value of TI-RADS ultrasonographic stratification in diagnosing single thyroid nodules. Henan Med Res. 2013;22:176–8. Article in Chinese.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cronan JJ. Thyroid nodules: is it time to turn off the US machines? Radiology. 2008;247:602–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chen SC, Cheung YC, Su CH, Chen MF, Hwang TL, et al. Analysis of sonographic features for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast tumors of different sizes. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23:188–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Park CS, Kim SH, Jung SL, Kang BJ, Kim JY, Choi JJ, et al. Observer variability in the sonographic evaluation of thyroid nodules. J Clin Ultrasound. 2010;38:287–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    D’Orsi CJ, Kopans DB. Mammographic feature analysis. Semin Roentgenol. 1993;28:204–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kopans DB. Standardized mammographic reporting. Radiol Clin N Am. 1992;30:257–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Marqusee E, Benson CB, Frates MC, Doubilet PM, Larsen PR, Cibas ES, et al. Usefulness of ultrasonography in the management of nodular thyroid disease. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:696–700.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang YX, Zhang B, Zhang ZH. Fine-needle aspiration cytology of thyroid nodules: a clinical evaluation. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2011;46:892–6. Article in Chinese.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Friedrich-Rust M, Meyer G, Dauth N, Berner C, Bogdanou D, Herrmann E, et al. Interobserver agreement of Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TIRADS) and strain elastography for the assessment of thyroid nodules. PLoS One. 2013;24:e77927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Oncology and BioMarkers (ISOBM) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and TherapyTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and HospitalTianjinChina
  2. 2.The Third Department of Breast Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and TherapyTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and HospitalTianjinChina
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and TherapyTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and HospitalTianjinChina
  4. 4.Department of Thyroid and Cervical Tumor, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and TherapyTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and HospitalTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations