| Literature DB >> 27275309 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with thyroid nodules represent common problem in daily routine of thyroidologists as well as other medical specialties. Fortunately only small number of thyroid nodules turns out to be malignant. Ultrasound is most frequently used imaging modality in the evaluation of thyroid nodules and certain ultrasonographic features are associated with greater risk for malignancy. AIM: The aim of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of various ultrasonographic findings regarding thyroid malignancy.Entities:
Keywords: fine-needle aspiration cytology; thyroid; thyroid cancer; thyroid nodules; ultrasonography
Year: 2015 PMID: 27275309 PMCID: PMC4877909 DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2015.124
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Open Access Maced J Med Sci ISSN: 1857-9655
Clinical data of patients and ultrasonographic characteristics of thyroid nodules
| Variables | ||
|---|---|---|
| Patients, n | 592 | |
| Age (y), range | 51.2 ± 13.9 | (13-85) |
| Thyroid nodules, n | 684 | |
| Biopsied nodules per patient | ||
| One | 501 | (84.6%) |
| Two | 90 | (15.2%) |
| Three | 1 | (0.2%) |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 69 | (11.7%) |
| Female | 523 | (88.3%) |
| Longest diameter (mm) | 22.9 ± 11.7 | (6-70) |
| Enlargement | 75 | (11%) |
| US features | ||
| Composition | ||
| Solid | 522 | (76.3%) |
| Mixed | 110 | (16.1%) |
| Cystic | 52 | (7.6%) |
| Echogenicity | ||
| Anechoic | 51 | (7.5%) |
| Hypoechoic | 271 | (39.6%) |
| Isoechoic | 295 | (43.1%) |
| Hyperechoic | 67 | (9.8%) |
| Margins | ||
| Clear | 639 | (93.4%) |
| Blurred | 45 | (6.6%) |
| Calcifications | ||
| No calcifications | 613 | (89.6%) |
| Macrocalcifications | 26 | (3.8%) |
| Microcalcifications | 45 | (6.6%) |
| Vascularisation | ||
| No/peripheral | 421 | (61.5%) |
| Limited central | 118 | (17.3%) |
| Marked central | 145 | (21.2%) |
| US suspicious | 120 | (17.5%) |
| Thyroid scan | ||
| No | 355 | (51.9%) |
| Yes | 329 | (48.1%) |
| Cold | 146/329 | (44.4%) |
| Indeterminate | 154/329 | (46.8%) |
| Hot | 29/329 | (8.8%) |
n, number; US, ultrasound.
Comparaison of clinical and ultrasonographic characteristics of benign and malignant thyroid nodules
| Variables | Benign | Malignant | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patients, n | 31 | 47 | |
| Age (y), | 48.2±14.2 | 50.3±14.6 | ns |
| Range | (16-74) | (22-77) | |
| Gender (male) | 6 (19.4%) | 9 (19.1%) | ns |
| Thyroid nodules, n | 35 | 49 | |
| Longest diameter (mm) | 30.7±13.9 | 26.9±13.2 | ns |
| Enlargement | 13 (37.1%) | 15 (30.6%) | ns |
| US solid composition | 28 (80%) | 43 (87.8%) | ns |
| Hypoechogenicity | 10 (28.6%) | 33 (67.3%) | 0.001 |
| OR | 1.97 (95% CI 1.3-3) | 0.001 | |
| Blurred margins | 4 (11.4%) | 13 (26.5%) | ns |
| Microcalcifications | 3 (8.6%) | 12 (24.5%) | ns (0.08) |
| OR | 3.5 (95% CI 0.9-13.4) | ns (0.07) | |
| Marked central vascularisation | 3 (8.6%) | 20 (40.8%) | 0.001 |
| OR | 7.4 (95% CI 1.98-27.4) | 0.003 | |
| US suspicious | 10 (28.6%) | 27 (55.1%) | 0.02 |
| OR | 3.1 (95% CI 1.2-7.7) | 0.017 | |
| Cold nodule (scan) | 13 (59.1%) | 23 (82.1%) | ns |
n, number; US, ultrasound.
FNAC results of histologically evaluated thyroid nodules
| FNAC result | All | Benign | Malignant |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benign | 29 (34.5%) | 21 | 8 |
| Malignant | 19 (22.6%) | 0 | 19 |
| Suspicious | 21 (25%) | 3 | 18 |
| Indeterminate | 7 (8.3%) | 5 | 2 |
| Inadequate | 8 (9.5%) | 6 | 2 |
FNAC-fine needle aspiration cytology.
Diagnostic performance of FNAC and US-findings
| Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | Accuracy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FNAC | 87.5% | 92.5% | 67.7% | 67.7% | 76.3% |
| Hypoechogenicity | 70.2% | 67.7% | 76.7% | 60% | 69.2% |
| Microcalcifications | 25.5% | 90.3% | 80% | 43% | 51.2% |
| Vascularisation+ | 42.6% | 90.3% | 86.9% | 62.2% | 61.5% |
| US suspicious | 57.4% | 67.7% | 72.9% | 51.2% | 61.5% |
FNAC, fine needle aspiration cytology; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.
Significance of ultrasonographic findings in predictive model for malignant thyroid nodules
| B | Wald | Sig. | Exp(B) | 95% Cl for EXP(B) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||||
| Step 1[ | Hypoecho. | -1.511 | 6.388 | .011 | .221 | .068 | .712 |
| US susp. | 1.248 | 1.823 | .177 | 3.482 | .569 | 21.309 | |
| margins | -1.453 | 2.650 | .104 | .234 | .041 | 1.345 | |
| microcalc. | -.988 | 1.100 | .294 | .372 | .059 | 2.359 | |
| vascul. + | -2.237 | 7.175 | .007 | .107 | .021 | .549 | |
| Step 2[ | Hypoecho. | -1.556 | 6.977 | .008 | .211 | .066 | .BB9 |
| US susp. | .752 | .983 | .321 | 2.122 | .480 | 9.389 | |
| margins | -1.304 | 2.407 | .121 | .272 | .052 | 1.410 | |
| vase I.+ | -2.017 | 7.016 | .008 | .133 | .030 | .592 | |
| Step 3[ | Hypoecho. | -1.295 | 6.321 | .012 | .274 | .100 | .752 |
| margins | -.830 | 1.481 | .224 | .436 | .114 | 1.660 | |
| vascul.+ | -1.745 | 6.219 | .013 | .175 | .044 | .688 | |
| Step 4[ | Hypoecho. | -1.405 | 7.736 | .005 | .245 | .091 | .660 |
| vascul.+ | -1.710 | 6.047 | .014 | .181 | .046 | .707 | |
variable(s) entered on step 1: hypoechogenecity, US suspicious, margins, microcalcifications, marked central vascularity