| Literature DB >> 31340198 |
Kristine Zøylner Swan1,2, Steen Joop Bonnema3, Marie Louise Jespersen4, Viveque Egsgaard Nielsen2.
Abstract
Thyroid nodular disease is common, but predicting the risk of malignancy can be difficult. In this prospective study, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of shear wave elastography (SWE) in predicting thyroid malignancy. Patients with thyroid nodules were enrolled from a surgical tertiary unit. Elasticity index (EI) measured by SWE was registered for seven EI outcomes assessing nodular stiffness and heterogeneity. The diagnosis was determined histologically. In total, 329 patients (mean age: 55 ± 13 years) with 413 thyroid nodules (mean size: 32 ± 13 mm, 88 malignant) were enrolled. Values of SWE region of interest (ROI) for malignant and benign nodules were highly overlapping (ranges for SWE-ROImean: malignant 3-100 kPa; benign 4-182 kPa), and no difference between malignant and benign nodules was found for any other EI outcome investigated (P = 0.13-0.96). There was no association between EI and the histological diagnosis by receiver operating characteristics analysis (area under the curve: 0.51-0.56). Consequently, defining a cut-off point of EI for the prediction of malignancy was not clinically meaningful. Testing our data on previously proposed cut-off points revealed a low accuracy of SWE (56-80%). By regression analysis, factors affecting EI included nodule size >30 mm, heterogeneous echogenicity, micro- or macrocalcifications and solitary nodule. In conclusion, EI, measured by SWE, showed huge overlap between malignant and benign nodules, and low diagnostic accuracy in the prediction of thyroid malignancy. Our study supports that firmness of thyroid nodules, as assessed by SWE, should not be a key feature in the evaluation of such lesions.Entities:
Keywords: diagnosis; elastography; thyroid; ultrasonography
Year: 2019 PMID: 31340198 PMCID: PMC6709542 DOI: 10.1530/EC-19-0324
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endocr Connect ISSN: 2049-3614 Impact factor: 3.335
Cytological results for nodules.
| BSRTC | Distribution, | Malignancy rate, % | Histological diagnosis |
|---|---|---|---|
| No FNAB | 69 (17) | 3 | 1 PTC, 1 met |
| BSRTC 1 | 50 (12) | 14 | 7 PTC |
| BSRTC 2 | 90 (22) | 7 | 3 PTC/3 miTC |
| BSRTC 3 | 29 (7) | 10 | 2 PTC, 1 lym |
| BSRTC 4 | 96 (23) | 25 | 8 PTC/2 miTC, 14 FTC |
| BSRTC 5 | 48 (12) | 40 | 14 PTC/3 miTC, 1 FTC, 1 met |
| BSRTC 6 | 30 (7) | 90 | 22 PTC/1 miTC, 1 FTC, 1 MTC, 2 sar |
| Total | 413 (100) | 21 |
BSRTC, Bethesda system of reporting thyroid cytology; FNAB, fine needle aspiration biopsy; FTC, follicular thyroid carcinoma; lym, lymphoma; met, metastasis from renal cell carcinoma; miTC, thyroid micro-carcinoma; MTC, medullary thyroid carcinoma; PTC, papillary thyroid carcinoma; sar, myxofibrosarcoma.
Figure 1SWE image depicting the ROIs used for EI measurements. Color-coded elasticity map overlying the B-mode US image. Soft areas with a low EI are colored blue, and changes to green, yellow and red with higher EI and increasing stiffness. To the right, the elasticity scale (0–100 kPa, top) and the EI measurements for the predefined ROIs (bottom) are shown.
Impact of clinical and ultrasound features on SWE-ROImean.
| Independent variable | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysisg | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ratio (95% CI) | Ratio (95% CI) | |||
| Age | 1.00 (0.99–1.01) | 0.48 | 1.00 (0.99–1.01) | 0.25 |
| Female gender | 1.02 (0.90–1.15) | 0.76 | 0.96 (0.84–1.09) | 0.53 |
| Previous RAI therapya | 1.02 (0.79–1.31) | 0.88 | ||
| Anti-TPO antibodies levelb | 1.00 (0.99–1.00) | 0.23 | 1.00 (0.99–1.00) | 0.22 |
| Size >30 mmc | 1.16 (1.04–1.29) | 0.01 | 1.18 (1.05–1.33) | 0.01 |
| Isthmic locationd | 1.09 (0.95–1.24) | 0.21 | 1.08 (0.93–1.26) | 0.32 |
| Previous FNAB | 0.99 (0.89–1.09) | 0.81 | 1.02 (0.91–1.14) | 0.74 |
| FNAB <30 days prior to SWE | 1.04 (0.88–1.22) | 0.64 | ||
| Malignant histologye | 0.99 (0.85–1.15) | 0.91 | ||
| Ultrasound features | ||||
| Heterogenicity | 1.19 (1.06–1.34) | 0.01 | 1.10 (0.96–1.26) | 0.18 |
| Hypoechogenicity | 1.04 (0.93–1.16) | 0.49 | 0.95 (0.84–1.08) | 0.42 |
| Microcalcifications | 1.17 (1.06–1.30) | 0.01 | 1.12 (0.99–1.26) | 0.06 |
| Macrocalcifications | 1.25 (1.06–1.47) | 0.01 | 1.12 (0.92–1.37) | 0.27 |
| Poor SWE signal | 0.95 (0.80–1.13) | 0.55 | 0.92 (0.77–1.10) | 0.34 |
| Solitary nodule | 0.86 (0.77–0.96) | 0.01 | 0.92 (0.81–1.04) | 0.20 |
| Solid composition | 0.91 (0.82–1.02) | 0.09 | 1.04 (0.92–1.18) | 0.50 |
| Skin-nodule distance | 0.99 (0.98–1.00) | 0.27 | ||
| TIRADS groupf | 1.07 (0.98–1.17) | 0.11 | ||
Dependent variable in regression analysis: logarithmic transformation of SWE-ROImean.
aSeventeen patients previously received RAI of 387 included in the analysis. bAnti-TPO antibodies tested in 264 patients (80%). cNodules >30 mm in the largest dimension, n = 216 (52%). dNodules located in the thyroid isthmus, n = 43 (10%). eExcluding nine thyroid micro-carcinomas. fTIRADS groups: 1 = low risk; 2 = intermediate risk; 3 = high risk. gAccording to the sample size, a subset of explanatory variables were excluded from the multivariate analysis. The variables assumed to influence elasticity measurements were chosen before data analysis. All explanatory variables were included in one multivariate regression analysis.
FNAB, fine-needle aspiration biopsy; RAI, radioiodine ablation; SWE, shear wave elastography; TIRADS, thyroid imaging reporting and data system.
Figure 2Flow of patients. *Including seven patients with thyroid micro-carcinoma.
Ultrasonographic features comparing malignant and benign nodules.
| Ultrasonographic features | Malignant | Benign | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nodule size, mm (mean ± | 33 ± 15 | 32 ± 13 | 0.88 |
| Skin-nodule distance, mm (mean ± | 18 ± 5 | 19 ± 5 | 0.25 |
| Nodularity, | |||
| Solitary nodule | 38 (48) | 107 (33) | 0.01b |
| Multinodular goiter | 41 (52) | 217 (67) | |
| Structure, | |||
| Cystic-solid | 22 (28) | 165 (51) | <0.01c |
| Echogenicity, | |||
| Hypoechoic | 68 (86) | 185 (57) | <0.01d |
| Heterogeneous echogenicity, | 64 (81) | 223 (68) | 0.03 |
| Microcalcifications, | 51 (65) | 150 (46) | 0.01 |
| Macrocalcifications, | 12 (15) | 41 (13) | 0.54 |
| Taller-than-wide shape, | 12 (15) | 37 (11) | 0.35 |
| Borders, | |||
| Halo present | 25 (32) | 139 (43) | 0.07e |
| Irregular margins, | 37 (47) | 103 (32) | 0.01f |
| Doppler flow, | |||
| Perinodular | 25 (32) | 148 (45) | 0.03g |
| TIRADS 2–3h
| 8 (10) | 71 (90) | 0.02 |
| Poor SWE signal, | 23 (29) | 59 (18) | 0.03 |
TIRADS, thyroid imaging reporting and data system.
aExcluding nine thyroid micro-carcinoma. bComparison of solitary nodules vs multinodular goiter in malignant and benign nodules. cComparison of cystic-solid vs solid structure in malignant and benign nodules. dComparison of hypoechoic vs non-hypoechoic (iso- and hyperechoic). eComparison of complete halo vs no complete halo. fComparison of irregular vs regular margins. gComparison of perinodular vs non-periondular flow (central, equal and no flow) in malignant and benign nodules. hFour nodules did not provide TIRADS score.
EI for the selected EI outcomes
| EI outcome, kPa | Malignanta | Benigna | ROCc | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median (range), IQR | ( | ( | AUC (95% CI) | |
| SWE-ROImean | 27 (3–100) | 28 (4–182) | 0.79 | 0.51 (0.42–0.59) |
| SWE-ROImax | 40 (11–148) | 39 (6–242) | 0.50 | 0.53 (0.44–0.61) |
| SWE-ROInn ratio | 2.4 (1.0–15.1) | 2.4 (1.1–27.6) | 0.13 | 0.55 (0.48–0.62) |
| SWE-Stiffmean | 33 (4–116) | 32 (4–192) | 0.96 | 0.52 (0.44–0.60) |
| SWE-Stiffmax | 39 (11–148) | 38 (6–242) | 0.52 | 0.52 (0.44–0.61) |
| SWE-Centermeand | 17 (4–51) | 16 (4–88) | 0.61 | 0.52 (0.44–0.61) |
| SWE-CenterSDd | 8.1 (1.5–31.6) | 7.1 (1.3–56.5) | 0.16 | 0.56 (0.48–0.64) |
| 5.1–11.9 | 5.0–9.6 |
aExcluding thyroid micro-carcinoma (n = 9) and nodules with missing EI values (n = 3). bTest of difference between median EI between benign and malignant nodules. cReceiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis area under the curve (AUC) for the prediction of malignancy. An AUC of 0.5 reflects that the optimal cut-off value yields an even chance of a test being true or false positive, while a value of 1.0 reflects that the cut-off value yields 100% sensitivity and specificity. d49 nodules did not provide data for the 10 mm center Q-box.
EI, elasticity index; IQR, interquartile range; kPa, kilo Pascal.
Figure 3Plot for SWE-ROImean specified by histological diagnosis. Box-and-whisker plot: The boxes display the interquartile range (IQR) and the median, while the whiskers display 1.5 times the IQR. Outliers beyond the whiskers are marked with individual dots. Elasticity index (EI); kilo Pascal (kPa); benign, n = 325; papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC), n = 57; follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC), n = 16; medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC), n = 1; thyroid micro-carcinoma (miTC), n = 9. Other: lymphoma (n = 1), renal cell carcinoma metastasis (n = 2), myxofibrosarcoma (n = 2 in one patient). The one outlier in the benign group is not shown (EI = 182 kPa).
SWE-ROImean tested on cut-off points proposed in previous studies.
| Cut-off pointa | Nodules in previous study | Test of present data on cut-off points proposed in previous studies | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimates, % (95% CI) | ||||||
| Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | Accuracy | ||
| 30 kPa (26) | 169 (30) | 46 (34–57) | 58 (53–64) | 21 (15–27) | 82 (77–87) | 56 (51–61) |
| 31 kPa (15) | 313 (62) | 46 (34–57) | 61 (56–66) | 22 (15–28) | 83 (78–87) | 58 (53–63) |
| 34 kPab (24) | 137 (66) | 38 (27–48) | 69 (64–74) | 22 (15–30) | 82 (78–87) | 63 (58–68) |
| 39 kPa (13) | 331 (31) | 26 (16–36) | 80 (75–84) | 23 (14–32) | 82 (78–86) | 69 (65–74) |
| 42 kPa (23) | 62 (27) | 23 (14–33) | 86 (82–90) | 27 (17–38) | 83 (80–87) | 75 (70–79) |
| 49 kPac (22) | 393 (6) | 17 (9–25) | 93 (90–96) | 36 (20–52) | 83 (79–86) | 78 (74–82) |
| 62 kPa (21) | 99 (21) | 9 (3–16) | 97 (95–99) | 41 (18–65) | 82 (78–86) | 80 (76–84) |
| 85 kPa (14) | 476 (80) | 3 (−1 to 6) | 99 (98–100) | 33 (−4 to 71) | 81 (77–85) | 80 (76–84) |
| Rago 2-3 (29) | 195 (20) | 33 (23–43) | 75 (70–80) | 24 (16–32) | 82 (78–87) | 67 (62–71) |
aCut-off points proposed in previous studies were selected for EI outcomes most similar to the definition of SWE-ROImean. bOnly nodules <10 mm. cThe cut-off point with the highest sum of sensitivity and specificity was selected.
kPa, kilo pascals; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value.