Korean Journal of Radiology

  • 제21권1호
  • /
  • Pages.108-116
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1229-6929(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-8330(eISSN)
대한영상의학회 (The Korean Society of Radiology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Concordance of Three International Guidelines for Thyroid Nodules Classified by Ultrasonography and Diagnostic Performance of Biopsy Criteria

  • Younghee Yim (Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, Kangwon National University, Kangwon National University Hospital) ;
  • Dong Gyu Na (Department of Radiology, GangNeung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Eun Ju Ha (Department of Radiology, Ajou University, School of Medicine) ;
  • Jung Hwan Baek (Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Jin Yong Sung (Department of Radiology, Thyroid Center, Daerim St. Mary's Hospital) ;
  • Ji-hoon Kim (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Won-Jin Moon (Department of Radiology, Konkuk University Medical Center, Konkuk University School of Medicine)
  • 투고 : 2019.03.31
  • 심사 : 2019.10.14
  • 발행 : 2020.01.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: To investigate the concordance of three international guidelines: the Korean Thyroid Association/Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology, American Thyroid Association, and American College of Radiology for thyroid nodules classified by ultrasonography (US) and the diagnostic performance of simulated size criteria for malignant biopsies. Materials and Methods: A total of 2586 thyroid nodules (≥ 1 cm) were collected from two multicenter study datasets. The classifications of the thyroid nodules were based on three different guidelines according to US categories for malignancy risk, and the concordance rate between the different guidelines was calculated for the classified nodules. In addition, the diagnostic performance of criteria related to four different simulated biopsy sizes was evaluated. Results: The concordance rate of nodules classified as high- or intermediate-suspicion was high (84.1-100%), but low-suspicion or mildly-suspicious nodules exhibited relatively low concordance (63.8-83.8%) between the three guidelines. The differences in sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy between the guidelines were 0.7-19.8%, 0-40.9%, and 0.1-30.5%, respectively, when the original biopsy criteria were applied. The differences decreased to 0-5.9%, 0-10.9%, and 0.1-8.2%, respectively, when simulated, similar biopsy size criteria were applied. The unnecessary biopsy rate calculated with the original criteria (0-33.8%), decreased with the simulated biopsy size criteria (0-8.7%). Conclusion: We found a high concordance between the three guidelines for high- or intermediate-suspicion nodules, and the diagnostic performance of the biopsy criteria was approximately equivalent for each simulated size criterion. The difference in diagnostic performance between the three guidelines is mostly influenced by the various size thresholds for biopsies.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Perros P, Boelaert K, Colley S, Evans C, Evans RM, Gerrard Ba G, et al.; British Thyroid Association. Guidelines for the management of thyroid cancer. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2014;81 Suppl 1:1-122 
  2. Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE, et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American Thyroid Association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid 2016;26:1-133 
  3. Gharib H, Papini E, Garber JR, Duick DS, Harrell RM, Hegedus L, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, American College of Endocrinology, and Associazione Medici Endocrinologi medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules-2016 update. Endocrine Practice 2016;22(Supple 1):1-60 
  4. Shin JH, Baek JH, Chung J, Ha EJ, Kim JH, Lee YH, et al.; Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) and Korean Society of Radiology. Ultrasonography diagnosis and imaging-based management of thyroid nodules: revised Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology consensus statement and recommendations. Korean J Radiol 2016;17:370-395 
  5. Tessler FN, Middleton WD, Grant EG, Hoang JK, Berland LL, Teefey SA, et al. ACR thyroid imaging, reporting and data system (TI-RADS): white paper of the ACR TI-RADS committee. J Am Coll Radiol 2017;14:587-595 
  6. Russ G, Bonnema SJ, Erdogan MF, Durante C, Ngu R, Leenhardt L. European Thyroid Association guidelines for ultrasound malignancy risk stratification of thyroid nodules in adults: the EU-TIRADS. Eur Thyroid J 2017;6:225-237 
  7. Ha EJ, Baek JH, Na DG. Risk stratification of thyroid nodules on ultrasonography: current status and perspectives. Thyroid 2017;27:1463-1468 
  8. Middleton WD, Teefey SA, Reading CC, Langer JE, Beland MD, Szabunio MM, et al. Comparison of performance characteristics of American College of Radiology TI-RADS, Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology TIRADS, and American Thyroid Association guidelines. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018;210:1148-1154 
  9. Ha EJ, Na DG, Baek JH, Sung JY, Kim JH, Kang SY. US fine-needle aspiration biopsy for thyroid malignancy: diagnostic performance of seven society guidelines applied to 2000 thyroid nodules. Radiology 2018;287:893-900 
  10. Ha EJ, Na DG, Moon WJ, Lee YH, Choi N. Diagnostic performance of ultrasound-based risk stratification systems for thyroid nodules: comparison of the 2015 ATA guidelines with the 2016 KTA/KSThR and 2017 ACR guidelines. Thyroid 2018;28:1532-1537 
  11. Grani G, Lamartina L, Ascoli V, Bosco D, Biffoni M, Giacomelli L, et al. Reducing the number of unnecessary thyroid biopsies while improving diagnostic accuracy: toward the "Right" TIRADS. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2019;104:95-102 
  12. Ha SM, Baek JH, Na DG, Suh CH, Chung SR, Choi YJ, et al. Diagnostic performance of practice guidelines for thyroid nodules: thyroid nodule size versus biopsy rates. Radiology 2019;291:92-99 
  13. Na DG, Baek JH, Sung JY, Kim JH, Kim JK, Choi YJ, et al. Thyroid imaging reporting and data system risk stratification of thyroid nodules: categorization based on solidity and echogenicity. Thyroid 2016;26:562-572 
  14. Ha EJ, Moon WJ, Na DG, Lee YH, Choi N, Kim SJ, et al. A multicenter prospective validation study for the Korean thyroid imaging reporting and data system in patients with thyroid nodules. Korean J Radiol 2016;17:811-821 
  15. Cibas ES, Ali SZ. The Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Am J Clin Pathol 2009;132:658-665 
  16. Jung CK, Min HS, Park HJ, Song DE, Kim JH, Park SY, et al.; Korean Endocrine Pathology Thyroid Core Needle Biopsy Study Group. Pathology reporting of thyroid core needle biopsy: a proposal of the Korean Endocrine Pathology Thyroid Core Needle Biopsy Study Group. J Pathol Transl Med 2015;49:288-299 
  17. Yoon JH, Lee HS, Kim EK, Moon HJ, Kwak JY. Malignancy risk stratification of thyroid nodules: comparison between the thyroid imaging reporting and data system and the 2014 American Thyroid Association management guidelines. Radiology 2016;278:917-924 
  18. Hong MJ, Na DG, Baek JH, Sung JY, Kim JH. Impact of nodule size on malignancy risk differs according to the ultrasonography pattern of thyroid nodules. Korean J Radiol 2018;19:534-541 
  19. Park JW, Kim DW, Kim D, Baek JW, Lee YJ, Baek HJ. Korean thyroid imaging reporting and data system features of follicular thyroid adenoma and carcinoma: a single-center study. Ultrasonography 2017;36:349-354 
  20. Ito Y, Miyauchi A, Oda H. Low-risk papillary microcarcinoma of the thyroid: a review of active surveillance trials. Eur J Surg Oncol 2018;44:307-315 
  21. Han JM, Kim WB, Kim TY, Ryu JS, Gong G, Hong SJ, et al. Time trend in tumour size and characteristics of anaplastic thyroid carcinoma. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2012;77:459-464