Xu Yan, Qi Xiaojie, Zhao Xia, Ren Wenfeng, Ding Wei
Department of Ultrasound, Rizhao People's Hospital, Jining Medical University, Shandong Province, PRC.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jan;98(4):e14051. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014051.
To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy and clinical value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) plus TI-RADS classification in benign and malignant thyroid tumors compared with either method alone.The informed consent was signed all patients. A total of 370 patients with thyroid tumors of TI-RADS category 3 and 4 were recruited, with 432 thyroid nodules. They respectively received routine ultrasonography and CEUS. The nodules were reclassified according to CEUS scoring, and a combined diagnosis was made. The pathological results were taken as the gold standard. The sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the ROC curve were calculated for the 3 diagnostic methods. The diagnostic efficacy was compared by using Student t test, Pearson chi-square (χ) test, McNemar chi-square (χ) test or Z test. Student t test and logistic regression were employed for comparing different imaging features of benign and malignant thyroid tumors on CEUS and risk analysis.Of 432 thyroid nodules, there were 258 malignant nodules (59.72%) and 174 benign ones (40.28%). By logistic regression, 6 suspicious features on CEUS were considered significant for differentiating malignant from benign tumors: slow entry of contrast agents during enhancement stage (OR = 15.610, P = .001), slow time to peak (OR = 7.416, P = .002), non-uniform enhancement (OR = 10.076, P = .023), enhancement pattern (irregular) (OR = 36.233, P = .002), enhancement boundary (unclear) (OR = 25.300, P = .012), and no ring-like enhancement (OR = 25.297, P = .004). CEUS plus TI-RADS classification showed a higher diagnostic efficacy for differentiating between benign and malignant thyroid tumors. The Se was 85.66% (0.806-0.896), Sp 83.33% (0.768-0.884), PPV 88.40% (0.836-0.919), NPV 79.67% (0.729-0.851), and AUC 0.867 ± 0.019 (0.815-0.889). The above indicators were of statistical significance as compared with TI-RADS classification or CEUS alone (P <.05).CEUS can more clearly visualize microvascular distribution of the nodules and offers a new approach to diagnose benign and malignant thyroid tumors. TI-RADS classification plus CEUS is more accurate than TI-RADS classification alone. This combined approach is worthy of clinical popularization.
为评估超声造影(CEUS)联合TI-RADS分类与单独使用这两种方法相比,在甲状腺良恶性肿瘤诊断中的效能及临床价值。所有患者均签署了知情同意书。共纳入370例TI-RADS 3类和4类甲状腺肿瘤患者,共计432个甲状腺结节。他们分别接受了常规超声检查和CEUS检查。根据CEUS评分对结节重新分类,并进行联合诊断。以病理结果作为金标准。计算三种诊断方法的灵敏度(Se)、特异度(Sp)、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)及ROC曲线下面积。采用Student t检验、Pearson卡方(χ)检验、McNemar卡方(χ)检验或Z检验比较诊断效能。采用Student t检验和逻辑回归比较CEUS上甲状腺良恶性肿瘤的不同影像学特征及进行风险分析。
在432个甲状腺结节中,恶性结节258个(59.72%),良性结节174个(40.28%)。通过逻辑回归分析,CEUS上6个可疑特征对鉴别良恶性肿瘤具有显著意义:增强期造影剂进入缓慢(OR = 15.610,P = 0.001)、达峰时间缓慢(OR = 7.416,P = 0.002)、增强不均匀(OR = 10.076,P = 0.023)、增强模式(不规则)(OR = 36.233,P = 0.002)、增强边界(不清)(OR = 25.300,P = 0.012)及无环状增强(OR = 25.297,P = 0.004)。CEUS联合TI-RADS分类在鉴别甲状腺良恶性肿瘤方面显示出更高的诊断效能。Se为85.66%(0.806 - 0.896),Sp为83.33%(0.768 - 0.884),PPV为88.40%(0.836 - 0.919),NPV为79.67%(0.729 - 0.851),AUC为0.867±0.019(0.815 - 0.889)。与单独的TI-RADS分类或CEUS相比,上述指标具有统计学意义(P <0 .05)。
CEUS能更清晰地显示结节的微血管分布,为甲状腺良恶性肿瘤的诊断提供了新途径。TI-RADS分类联合CEUS比单独的TI-RADS分类更准确。这种联合方法值得临床推广。