Suppr超能文献

ACR-TIRADS和EU-TIRADS在甲状腺结节FNA-US评估中的前瞻性比较。

A prospective comparison of ACR-TIRADS and EU-TIRADS in thyroid nodule assessment for FNA-US.

作者信息

Eidt Laura Berton, Nunes de Oliveira Cáren, Lagos Yago Borges Biz De, Solera Geise Lilian Menezes, Izquierdo Rogério, Meyer Erika Laurini de Souza, Mattevi Vanessa Suñé, Golbert Lenara

机构信息

Endocrine Division, Irmandade da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.

Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre-UFCSPA, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.

出版信息

Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2023 Mar;98(3):415-425. doi: 10.1111/cen.14799. Epub 2022 Aug 3.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Prospective data on the accuracy of ultrasound (US) classification systems in thyroid nodules are still scarce. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of the American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR-TIRADS) and European (EU)-TIRADS classification systems.

DESIGN AND PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with one or more thyroid nodule(s) who underwent fine-needle aspiration (FNA) under ultrasonographic guidance (FNA-US) were prospectively evaluated.

MEASUREMENTS

Clinical evaluation and US data were collected. The reference standard used for this study was FNA-US cytology and histopathological diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 186 thyroid nodules in 166 patients were evaluated, resulting in 168 nodules from 149 patients with conclusive benign or malignant results. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and false negative (FN) were 100.0%, 28.7%, 100.0% and 0.0%, respectively, for ACR-TIRADS; and 90.0%, 19.1%, 96.8% and 9.1% (n = 1), respectively, for EU-TIRADS. The number of unnecessary FNA-US indicated by ACR-TIRADS was lower than EU-TIRADS (71.3% vs. 80.9%, p = .017), and the number of possibly avoided FNA-US was higher (26.7% vs. 17.8%). Using the same threshold of ACR-TIRADS to indicate FNA-US in EU-TIRADS 3 nodules (2.5 cm), there was an improvement in specificity (30.6%) and avoided FNA-US (28.6%). The best performance of both systems was demonstrated when FNA-US would be indicated only in highly suspicious nodules and/or in the presence of lymphadenopathy, with 85.7% and 89.3% of possibly avoided FNA-US for ACR-TIRADS and EU-TIRADS, respectively, without increasing FN.

CONCLUSION

Both systems presented high sensitivity, but low specificity in selecting nodules for FNA-US. The use of nodular size for FNA-US selection is questioned.

摘要

目的

关于超声(US)甲状腺结节分类系统准确性的前瞻性数据仍然匮乏。本研究旨在比较美国放射学会甲状腺影像报告和数据系统(ACR-TIRADS)与欧洲(EU)-TIRADS分类系统的准确性。

设计与患者

对在超声引导下接受细针穿刺活检(FNA)的连续的有一个或多个甲状腺结节的患者进行前瞻性评估。

测量

收集临床评估和超声数据。本研究使用的参考标准是FNA-US细胞学和组织病理学诊断。

结果

对166例患者的186个甲状腺结节进行了评估,149例患者的168个结节得出了明确的良性或恶性结果。ACR-TIRADS的敏感性、特异性、阴性预测值(NPV)和假阴性(FN)分别为100.0%、28.7%、100.0%和0.0%;EU-TIRADS的敏感性、特异性、阴性预测值和假阴性分别为90.0%、19.1%、96.8%和9.1%(n = 1)。ACR-TIRADS提示的不必要FNA-US数量低于EU-TIRADS(71.3%对80.9%,p = 0.017),可能避免的FNA-US数量更高(26.7%对17.8%)。在EU-TIRADS 3类结节(2.5 cm)中使用ACR-TIRADS相同的阈值来提示FNA-US,特异性提高(30.6%),FNA-US得以避免(28.6%)。当仅对高度可疑结节和/或存在淋巴结病的结节进行FNA-US时,两个系统均表现出最佳性能,ACR-TIRADS和EU-TIRADS可能避免的FNA-US分别为85.7%和89.3%,且未增加FN。

结论

两个系统在选择FNA-US的结节时均表现出高敏感性,但特异性较低。对于使用结节大小来选择FNA-US提出质疑。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验