| Literature DB >> 31482001 |
Allen San Shell Jabar1, Prakashini Koteshwara1, Jasbon Andrade1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic reliability of Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS) classifications described by American College of Radiology (ACR) and Kwak et al. by calculating the risk of malignancy, to assess the role of TI-RADS in reducing fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of benign lesions.Entities:
Keywords: ACR-TI-RADS; Kwak TI-RADS; fine-needle aspiration cytology; thyroid imaging reporting and data system; thyroid nodule; thyroid ultrasound
Year: 2019 PMID: 31482001 PMCID: PMC6717936 DOI: 10.5114/pjr.2019.86823
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pol J Radiol ISSN: 1733-134X
Cross tabulation depicting nodule distribution in Kwak and ACR TI-RADS
| ACR TI-RADS | Total | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TR1 | TR2 | TR3 | TR4 | TR5 | |||
| Kwak TI-RADS | TI-RADS 2 Benign | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| TI-RADS 3 Probably benign | 0 | 26 | 10 | 3 | 0 | 39 | |
| TI-RADS 4A Low suspicion of malignancy | 0 | 1 | 27 | 22 | 1 | 51 | |
| TI-RADS 4B Intermediate suspicion of malignancy | 0 | 0 | 6 | 16 | 6 | 28 | |
| TI-RADS 4C Moderate suspicion of malignancy | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | |
| Total | 6 | 27 | 43 | 41 | 10 | 127 | |
Frequency of ultrasound features of thyroid nodules according to ACR-TI-RADS descriptors
| Ultrasound feature | Benign | Malignant | Total | Risk of malignancy (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Composition | Cystic or predominantly cystic | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Spongiform | 4 | 0 | 4 | 0 | |
| Mixed solid-cystic | 44 | 0 | 44 | 0 | |
| Solid or predominantly solid | 54 | 23 | 77 | 29.8 | |
| Echogenicity | Anechoic | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Hyperechoic or isoechoic | 89 | 6 | 95 | 6.3 | |
| Hypoechoic | 8 | 16 | 24 | 66.6 | |
| Very hypoechoic | 0 | 1 | 1 | 100 | |
| Shape | Wider than tall or round | 98 | 20 | 118 | 16.9 |
| Taller than wide | 2 | 3 | 5 | 60.0 | |
| Margin | Smooth | 79 | 16 | 95 | 16.8 |
| Ill-defined | 16 | 4 | 20 | 20.0 | |
| Lobulated or irregular | 4 | 3 | 7 | 42.8 | |
| Extra-thyroidal extension | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Echogenic foci | None/large comet tail artefact | 66 | 10 | 76 | 13.1 |
| Macrocalcifications | 21 | 6 | 27 | 22.2 | |
| Peripheral rim calcification | 11 | 3 | 14 | 21.4 | |
| Punctate echogenic foci | 2 | 4 | 6 | 66.6 | |
Statistical results of suspicious ultrasound features
| Feature | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | PLR | NLR | OR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solid composition | 100 | 48 | 29.8 | 100 | 1.9 | 0.0 | 43.5 | 0.008 |
| Irregular + ill-defined margin | 30.4 | 80.7 | 25.9 | 84.0 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 1.8 | 0.239 |
| Irregular margin | 13.0 | 96.1 | 42.8 | 83.3 | 3.3 | 0.9 | 3.7 | 0.09 |
| Ill-defined margin | 17.3 | 84.6 | 20.0 | 82.2 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 0.8 |
| Taller than wide | 8.7 | 98.0 | 50.0 | 82.9 | 4.5 | 0.9 | 4.85 | 0.12 |
| Micro-calcification | 17.4 | 98.0 | 66.6 | 84.3 | 9.0 | 0.8 | 10.7 | 0.008 |
| Calcification | 56.5 | 66.9 | 27.6 | 87.3 | 1.7 | 0.6 | 2.63 | 0.039 |
| Macro-calcification | 26.0 | 79.8 | 22.2 | 83.0 | 1.29 | 0.9 | 1.39 | 0.53 |
| Peripheral rim calcification | 8.7 | 89.4 | 15.3 | 81.5 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.26 |
| Hypoechoic | 69.5 | 92.0 | 66.7 | 92.9 | 8.7 | 0.3 | 26.2 | < 0.0001 |
In our study, while categorising lesions based on Kwak TI-RADS, we considered the margin characteristic ‘ill-defined’ along with irregular margins, similarly to studies by Srinivas et al. and Chandramohan et al., who also evaluated Kwak TI-RADS. Kwak et al. and ACR-TI-RADS do not mention ill-defined margin as suspicious feature.
Comparison of malignancy risk according to various studies that employed Kwak TI-RADS
| TI-RADS | Risk of malignancy [%] | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kwak | Kwak | Chandramohan | Srinivas | Our study | |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 2 | 0 | 6.6 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 1.7 | 7.3 | 32 | 0.64 | 0 |
| 4A | 3.3 | 8.3-96.6 | 36 | 4.76 | 21.5 |
| 4B | 9.2 | 64 | 66.67 | 32.4 | |
| 4C | 44.4-72.4 | 59 | 83.33 | 100 | |
| 5 | 87.5 | 91 | 100 | ||
Comparison of statistical results analysing the significance of hypoechogenicity between various studies
| Suspicious ultrasound feature | Malignant nodule | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Present | Absent | ||||
| Hypoechogenicity | Present | Kwak | 169 | 508 | 677 |
| Chandra-mohan | 41 | 24 | 65 | ||
| Srinivas | 5 | 88 | 93 | ||
| Our study | 16 | 8 | 24 | ||
| Absent | Kwak | 106 | 875 | 981 | |
| Chandra-mohan | 77 | 130 | 207 | ||
| Srinivas | 20 | 252 | 272 | ||
| Our study | 7 | 96 | 103 | ||
| Hypoechogenicity | Kwak | Chandra-mohan | Srinivas | Our study | |
| Sensitivity (%) | 61.4 | 34.7 | 20.0 | 69.5 | |
| Specificity (%) | 63.2 | 84.4 | 74.1 | 92.0 | |
| PPV (%) | 24.9 | 63.0 | 5.3 | 66.7 | |
| OR | 2.7 | 2.8 | 0.7 | 26.2 | |
| < 0.0001 | 0.0003 | 0.51 | < 0.0001 | ||
Frequency and statistical analysis of calcification in thyroid nodules
| Ultrasound feature | Benign | Malignant | Total | Risk of malignancy (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Echogenic foci | None/large comet tail artefact | 66 | 10 | 76 | 13.1 |
| Macrocalcifications | 21 | 6 | 27 | 22.2 | |
| Peripheral rim calcification | 11 | 3 | 14 | 21.4 | |
| Punctate echogenic foci | 2 | 4 | 6 | 66.6 | |
| Micro-calcification | Present | 4 | 2 | 6 | 66.7 |
| Absent | 19 | 102 | 121 | ||
| Calcification | Present | 13 | 34 | 47 | 27.6 |
| Absent | 10 | 69 | 79 | ||
Comparison of risk of malignancy predicted in ACR TI-RADS
| ACR TI-RADS | Risk of malignancy [%] | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| ACR predicted (%) | Middleton | Our study | |
| TR1 | < 2 | 0.3 | 0 |
| TR2 | 1.5 | 0 | |
| TR3 | 5 | 4.8 | 6.9 |
| TR4 | 5.1-20 | 9.1 | 29.2 |
| TR5 | > 20 | 35.0 | 80 |