Department of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Radiology, McMaster University, St Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022 Feb 1;148(2):107-118. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2021.3387.
The use of ultrasonography (US) vs cross-sectional imaging for preoperative evaluation of papillary thyroid cancer is debated.
To compare thyroid US and computed tomography (CT) in the preoperative evaluation of papillary thyroid cancer for cervical lymph node metastasis (CLNM), as well as extrathyroidal disease extension.
MEDLINE and Embase were searched from January 1, 2000, to July 18, 2020.
Studies reporting on the diagnostic accuracy of US and/or CT in individuals with treatment-naive papillary thyroid cancer for CLNM and/or extrathyroidal disease extension were included. The reference standard was defined as histopathology/cytology or imaging follow-up. Independent title and abstract review (2515 studies) followed by full-text review (145 studies) was completed by multiple investigators.
PRISMA guidelines were followed. Methodologic and diagnostic accuracy data were abstracted independently by multiple investigators. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool independently and in duplicate. Bivariate random-effects model meta-analysis and multivariable meta-regression modeling was used.
Diagnostic test accuracy of US and CT of the neck for lateral and central compartment CLNM, as well as for extrathyroidal disease extension, determined prior to study commencement.
A total of 47 studies encompassing 31 942 observations for thyroid cancer (12 771 with CLNM; 1747 with extrathyroidal thyroid extension) were included; 21 and 26 studies were at low and high risk for bias, respectively. Based on comparative design studies, US and CT demonstrated no significant difference in sensitivity (73% [95% CI, 64%-80%] and 77% [95% CI, 67%-85%], respectively; P = .11) or specificity (89% [95% CI, 80%-94%] and 88% [95% CI, 79%-94%], respectively; P = .79) for lateral compartment CLNM. For central compartment metastasis, sensitivity was higher in CT (39% [95% CI, 27%-52%]) vs US (28% [95% CI, 21%-36%]; P = .004), while specificity was higher in US (95% [95% CI, 92%-98%]) vs CT (87% [95% CI, 77%-93%]; P < .001). Ultrasonography demonstrated a sensitivity of 91% (95% CI, 81%-96%) and specificity of 47% (95% CI, 35%-60%) for extrathyroidal extension.
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that further study is warranted of the role of CT for papillary thyroid cancer staging, possibly as an adjunct to US.
对于甲状腺乳头状癌的术前评估,超声检查(US)与横断面成像的使用存在争议。
比较甲状腺 US 和计算机断层扫描(CT)在甲状腺乳头状癌术前评估中对颈部淋巴结转移(CLNM)以及甲状腺外疾病扩展的作用。
从 2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 7 月 18 日,检索 MEDLINE 和 Embase。
纳入了报告治疗前甲状腺乳头状癌患者 CLNM 和/或甲状腺外疾病扩展的 US 和/或 CT 诊断准确性的研究。参考标准定义为组织病理学/细胞学或影像学随访。多位研究者进行了独立的标题和摘要审查(2515 项研究),然后进行全文审查(145 项研究)。
遵循 PRISMA 指南。多位研究者独立提取方法学和诊断准确性数据。使用独立和重复的 Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies(QUADAS-2)工具对偏倚风险进行评估。使用双变量随机效应模型荟萃分析和多变量荟萃回归模型。
在研究开始前,确定了颈部侧区和中央区 CLNM 以及甲状腺外疾病扩展的甲状腺 US 和 CT 的诊断准确性。
共纳入了 47 项研究,涉及 31942 例甲状腺癌观察结果(12771 例伴有 CLNM;1747 例伴有甲状腺外甲状腺扩展);21 项和 26 项研究的偏倚风险分别较低和较高。基于对比设计研究,US 和 CT 在前侧区 CLNM 的敏感性(分别为 73%[95%CI,64%-80%]和 77%[95%CI,67%-85%];P=0.11)或特异性(分别为 89%[95%CI,80%-94%]和 88%[95%CI,79%-94%];P=0.79)方面无显著差异。对于中央区转移,CT 的敏感性(39%[95%CI,27%-52%])高于 US(28%[95%CI,21%-36%];P=0.004),而 US 的特异性(95%[95%CI,92%-98%])高于 CT(87%[95%CI,77%-93%];P<0.001)。超声检查对甲状腺外扩展的敏感性为 91%(95%CI,81%-96%),特异性为 47%(95%CI,35%-60%)。
本系统评价和荟萃分析的结果表明,需要进一步研究 CT 在甲状腺乳头状癌分期中的作用,可能作为 US 的辅助手段。