Gali Shapira-Zaltsberg1,2, Elka Miller3,4, Claudia Martinez-Rios3,4, Juan Bass4,5, Ellen B Goldbloom4,6, Ken Tang4,7, Lamia Hayawi4,7, Kerri Highmore3,4. 1. Department of Medical Imaging, CHEO, 401 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L1, Canada. Shapira.gali1979@gmail.com. 2. University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. Shapira.gali1979@gmail.com. 3. Department of Medical Imaging, CHEO, 401 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8L1, Canada. 4. University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 5. Department of General Surgery, CHEO, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 6. Department of Endocrinology, CHEO, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 7. Research Institute, CHEO, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Kwak Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (Kwak-TI-RADS) guideline (2011) and American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TI-RADS) guideline (2017) were developed as ultrasound (US) risk stratification tools for detecting thyroid malignancy in adults. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-rater reliability and diagnostic performance of the ACR TI-RADS guideline in the pediatric population and compare it to the Kwak guideline. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study comprised 75 children who underwent thyroid US at a tertiary-level pediatric hospital. Three pediatric radiologists and one pediatric radiology fellow graded the US findings using the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines. We assessed reliability of radiologists' ratings using percentage inter-rater agreement, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC2,1). We assessed area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUROCC) to compare the discriminative diagnostic ability of the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS scoring systems against histopathology/cytology, or stability on US over a 2-year follow-up period for cases without tissue diagnosis. RESULTS: The inter-rater agreement was significantly better for the ACR TI-RADS level compared to the Kwak-TI-RADS level (P<0.001) using the percentage pairwise agreement. The ROC curves for assessing the diagnostic performance of the two methods showed no significant difference between the methods. The AUROCCs for the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS levels were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.82) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.61-0.82), respectively. CONCLUSION: Both the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines provide moderate malignancy risk stratification for thyroid nodules in the pediatric population, with better inter-rater agreement for the ACR TI-RADS guideline. Further work to adjust the recommendations for pediatric patients is necessary.
BACKGROUND: The Kwak Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (Kwak-TI-RADS) guideline (2011) and American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TI-RADS) guideline (2017) were developed as ultrasound (US) risk stratification tools for detecting thyroid malignancy in adults. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-rater reliability and diagnostic performance of the ACR TI-RADS guideline in the pediatric population and compare it to the Kwak guideline. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study comprised 75 children who underwent thyroid US at a tertiary-level pediatric hospital. Three pediatric radiologists and one pediatric radiology fellow graded the US findings using the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines. We assessed reliability of radiologists' ratings using percentage inter-rater agreement, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC2,1). We assessed area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUROCC) to compare the discriminative diagnostic ability of the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS scoring systems against histopathology/cytology, or stability on US over a 2-year follow-up period for cases without tissue diagnosis. RESULTS: The inter-rater agreement was significantly better for the ACR TI-RADS level compared to the Kwak-TI-RADS level (P<0.001) using the percentage pairwise agreement. The ROC curves for assessing the diagnostic performance of the two methods showed no significant difference between the methods. The AUROCCs for the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS levels were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.82) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.61-0.82), respectively. CONCLUSION: Both the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines provide moderate malignancy risk stratification for thyroid nodules in the pediatric population, with better inter-rater agreement for the ACR TI-RADS guideline. Further work to adjust the recommendations for pediatric patients is necessary.
Entities:
Keywords:
Carcinoma; Children; Nodules; Thyroid; Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System; Ultrasound
Authors: Gary L Francis; Steven G Waguespack; Andrew J Bauer; Peter Angelos; Salvatore Benvenga; Janete M Cerutti; Catherine A Dinauer; Jill Hamilton; Ian D Hay; Markus Luster; Marguerite T Parisi; Marianna Rachmiel; Geoffrey B Thompson; Shunichi Yamashita Journal: Thyroid Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Franklin N Tessler; William D Middleton; Edward G Grant; Jenny K Hoang; Lincoln L Berland; Sharlene A Teefey; John J Cronan; Michael D Beland; Terry S Desser; Mary C Frates; Lynwood W Hammers; Ulrike M Hamper; Jill E Langer; Carl C Reading; Leslie M Scoutt; A Thomas Stavros Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2017-04-02 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Bryan R Haugen; Erik K Alexander; Keith C Bible; Gerard M Doherty; Susan J Mandel; Yuri E Nikiforov; Furio Pacini; Gregory W Randolph; Anna M Sawka; Martin Schlumberger; Kathryn G Schuff; Steven I Sherman; Julie Ann Sosa; David L Steward; R Michael Tuttle; Leonard Wartofsky Journal: Thyroid Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Claudia Martinez-Rios; Alan Daneman; Lydia Bajno; Danielle C M van der Kaay; Rahim Moineddin; Jonathan D Wasserman Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2017-10-05
Authors: Jin Young Kwak; Kyung Hwa Han; Jung Hyun Yoon; Hee Jung Moon; Eun Ju Son; So Hee Park; Hyun Kyung Jung; Ji Soo Choi; Bo Mi Kim; Eun-Kyung Kim Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-07-19 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Alex C Essenmacher; Peter H Joyce; Simon C Kao; Monica Epelman; Liuska M Pesce; Michael P D'Alessandro; Yutaka Sato; Craig M Johnson; Daniel J Podberesky Journal: Radiographics Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Danielle M Richman; Carol B Benson; Peter M Doubilet; Hope E Peters; Stephen A Huang; Elizabeth Asch; Ari J Wassner; Jessica R Smith; Christine E Cherella; Mary C Frates Journal: Radiology Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 11.105