PURPOSE: To evaluate measurements of thyroid volume by two different US methods and CT in a blinded design. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four observers evaluated 27 patients. Observer 1 used US and calculated thyroid volume based on recordings of cross-sections through the gland. Observer 2 used US and calculated the volume of each lobe as a rotation ellipsoid. Observers A and B used CT images and calculated thyroid volume based on recordings of cross-sections through the gland. All measurements were made twice. RESULTS: The median thyroid volume was 81 ml (range 7-470 ml) evaluated by CT. All three methods had fair reproducibility. When correlating the two different methods using US, an r of 0.837 was found. When correlating data from patients without intrathoracic goitre evaluated by US (Observer 1) and CT, r = 0.945. The method based on a rotation ellipsoid systematically produced smaller thyroid volumes than those of the cross-sectional method. Evaluation by US systematically produced smaller thyroid volumes than CT. CONCLUSION: Calculation of thyroid volume based on US recordings of cross-sectional areas is a reproducible method in patients without substernal goitre extension. The US method calculating thyroid volume as a rotation ellipsoid is less reproducible, especially in large goitres. Measurement of thyroid volume using CT should be preferred in goitres with substernal extension.
PURPOSE: To evaluate measurements of thyroid volume by two different US methods and CT in a blinded design. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four observers evaluated 27 patients. Observer 1 used US and calculated thyroid volume based on recordings of cross-sections through the gland. Observer 2 used US and calculated the volume of each lobe as a rotation ellipsoid. Observers A and B used CT images and calculated thyroid volume based on recordings of cross-sections through the gland. All measurements were made twice. RESULTS: The median thyroid volume was 81 ml (range 7-470 ml) evaluated by CT. All three methods had fair reproducibility. When correlating the two different methods using US, an r of 0.837 was found. When correlating data from patients without intrathoracic goitre evaluated by US (Observer 1) and CT, r = 0.945. The method based on a rotation ellipsoid systematically produced smaller thyroid volumes than those of the cross-sectional method. Evaluation by US systematically produced smaller thyroid volumes than CT. CONCLUSION: Calculation of thyroid volume based on US recordings of cross-sectional areas is a reproducible method in patients without substernal goitre extension. The US method calculating thyroid volume as a rotation ellipsoid is less reproducible, especially in large goitres. Measurement of thyroid volume using CT should be preferred in goitres with substernal extension.
Authors: Alois Gessl; Wolfgang Raber; Anton Staudenherz; Alexander Becherer; Oskar Koperek; Andrea Hofmann Journal: Endocr Pathol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.943
Authors: M Ruggieri; A Fumarola; A Straniero; A Maiuolo; I Coletta; A Veltri; A Di Fiore; P Trimboli; P Gargiulo; M Genderini; M D'Armiento Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2008-08-09 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Leonardo Haddad; Fernanda L M Haddad; Lia Bittencourt; Luis Carlos Gregório; Sergio Tufik; Marcio Abrahão Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 2.816
Authors: N Shinohara; M Takahashi; T Kamishima; H Ikushima; N Otsuka; A Ishizu; C Shimizu; H Kanayama; K Nonomura Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-12-14 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Zoë Y G J van Lierop; Sander Jentjens; Monique H M E Anten; Roel Wierts; Connie T Stumpel; Bas Havekes; Marinus J P G van Kroonenburgh Journal: Eur Thyroid J Date: 2018-06-05