Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 86 Asanbyeongwon-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Eur Radiol. 2021 May;31(5):2877-2885. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07384-6. Epub 2020 Oct 15.
To summarize and compare unnecessary biopsy rates and diagnostic performance in the examination of thyroid nodules according to four representative US-based risk stratification systems.
MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched to identify original articles investigating unnecessary biopsy rates according to at least one of the following guidelines: ACR-TIRADS, ATA, EU-TIRADS, and K-TIRADS. The unnecessary biopsy rates for each risk stratification system were pooled using a random-effects model. Meta-regression analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity. Diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) for the appropriate selection of thyroid nodules for fine-needle aspiration were also pooled using a bivariate random-effects model.
Eight articles including 13,092 thyroid nodules met the eligibility criteria and were included. The pooled unnecessary biopsy rates of ACR-TIRADS, ATA, EU-TIRADS, and K-TIRADS were 25% (95% CI, 22-29%), 51% (95% CI, 44-58%), 38% (95% CI, 16-66%), and 55% (95% CI, 42-67%), respectively. The pooled unnecessary biopsy rate of ACR-TIRADS was significantly lower than that of ATA (p < .001) and K-TIRADS (p < .001), and also lower than that of EU-TIRADS, but not reaching statistical significance (p = .087). The pooled DORs of ACR-TIRADS, ATA, and K-TIRADS were 5.9 (95% CI, 3.6-9.6), 6.3 (95% CI, 4.5-8.8), and 4.5 (95% CI, 1.7-11.6), respectively, with the differences not being statistically significant.
ACR-TIRADS showed a lower unnecessary biopsy rate than the other risk stratification systems albeit DOR was comparable between ACR-TIRADS, ATA, and K-TIRADS. Future revisions of each system should be made by referring to ACR-TIRADS to reduce unnecessary biopsy rates.
• The pooled unnecessary biopsy rates of ACR-TIRADS, ATA, EU-TIRADS, and K-TIRADS were 25% (95% CI, 22-29%), 51% (95% CI, 44-58%), 38% (95% CI, 16-66%), and 55% (95% CI, 42-67%), respectively. • The pooled unnecessary biopsy rate of ACR-TIRADS was significantly lower than that of ATA (p < .001) and K-TIRADS (p < .001). • The pooled DORs of ACR-TIRADS, ATA, and K-TIRADS were 5.9 (95% CI, 3.6-9.6), 6.3 (95% CI, 4.5-8.8), and 4.5 (95% CI, 1.7-11.6), respectively, with the differences not being statistically significant.
总结并比较四种具有代表性的基于美国的风险分层系统在甲状腺结节检查中不必要的活检率和诊断性能。
通过 MEDLINE/PubMed 和 EMBASE 数据库搜索,确定了至少根据以下指南之一调查不必要活检率的原始文章:ACR-TIRADS、ATA、EU-TIRADS 和 K-TIRADS。使用随机效应模型汇总每个风险分层系统的不必要活检率。进行荟萃回归分析以探索异质性。还使用双变量随机效应模型汇总了用于细针抽吸适当选择甲状腺结节的诊断优势比 (DOR)。
纳入了符合入选标准的 8 篇文章,共纳入 13092 个甲状腺结节。ACR-TIRADS、ATA、EU-TIRADS 和 K-TIRADS 的汇总不必要活检率分别为 25%(95%CI,22-29%)、51%(95%CI,44-58%)、38%(95%CI,16-66%)和 55%(95%CI,42-67%)。ACR-TIRADS 的汇总不必要活检率明显低于 ATA(p<0.001)和 K-TIRADS(p<0.001),也低于 EU-TIRADS,但无统计学意义(p=0.087)。ACR-TIRADS、ATA 和 K-TIRADS 的汇总 DOR 分别为 5.9(95%CI,3.6-9.6)、6.3(95%CI,4.5-8.8)和 4.5(95%CI,1.7-11.6),差异无统计学意义。
尽管 ACR-TIRADS 的 DOR 与 ATA 和 K-TIRADS 相当,但与其他风险分层系统相比,ACR-TIRADS 显示出较低的不必要活检率。每个系统的未来修订都应参考 ACR-TIRADS 进行,以降低不必要的活检率。
ACR-TIRADS、ATA、EU-TIRADS 和 K-TIRADS 的汇总不必要活检率分别为 25%(95%CI,22-29%)、51%(95%CI,44-58%)、38%(95%CI,16-66%)和 55%(95%CI,42-67%)。
ACR-TIRADS 的汇总不必要活检率明显低于 ATA(p<0.001)和 K-TIRADS(p<0.001)。
ACR-TIRADS、ATA 和 K-TIRADS 的汇总 DOR 分别为 5.9(95%CI,3.6-9.6)、6.3(95%CI,4.5-8.8)和 4.5(95%CI,1.7-11.6),差异无统计学意义。