Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR Awards, New Junior Editors, and more. Read the latest AJNR updates

Research ArticleHead & Neck

Ultrasound-Based Diagnostic Classification for Solid and Partially Cystic Thyroid Nodules

D.W. Kim, J.S. Park, H.S. In, H.J. Choo, J.H. Ryu and S.J. Jung
American Journal of Neuroradiology June 2012, 33 (6) 1144-1149; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A2923
D.W. Kim
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.S. Park
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H.S. In
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H.J. Choo
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.H. Ryu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S.J. Jung
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The ability of US to differentiate benign thyroid nodules from malignant ones is still a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic efficacy of a US-based classification system for solid and PCTNs through a prospectively designed study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 1289 thyroid nodules in 1036 patients who underwent thyroid US, US-FNA, and thyroid surgery. Each thyroid nodule was prospectively classified into 1 of 5 diagnostic categories following real-time US examination: benign, probably benign, borderline, possibly malignant, and malignant. Solid nodules were classified by using all 5 categories, and PCTNs were classified by all except the borderline category. We calculated the diagnostic efficacy of thyroid US by comparing US diagnoses with histopathologic results of surgically resected thyroid nodules.

RESULTS: One thousand fifty-five solid nodules and 234 PCTNs were prospectively classified as benign (n = 435 and 179), probably benign (n = 213 and 25), borderline (n = 94 and 0), possibly malignant (n = 115 and 15), and malignant (n = 198 and 15), respectively. Of these 1289 nodules, 505 were surgically resected and confirmed by pathology (191 benign and 314 malignant nodules); there were 44 resected solid nodules with a borderline category. For solid nodules and PCTNs, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of US diagnosis were 86.1 and 66.7, 90.0 and 88.9, 94.3 and 75.0, 77.3 and 84.2, and 87.5% and 81.5%, respectively, based on 505 surgical specimens and excluding the 42 solid borderline nodules.

CONCLUSIONS: Our US-based classification system can provide helpful guidance for the management of thyroid nodules.

ABBREVIATIONS:

FNA
fine-needle aspiration
PCTN
partially cystic thyroid nodule
PCTN-US
US class of partially cystic thyroid nodule
SN-US class
US class of solid nodule
US
sonography

Thyroid US is the first imaging study of choice in the evaluation of thyroid nodules, but its ability to differentiate benign thyroid nodules from malignant ones is still a matter of debate.1⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–10 Currently, US-FNA is the accepted method for the diagnostic evaluation of thyroid nodules.11⇓⇓⇓–15 This approach, however, is limited by its invasiveness, cost, the possibility of inadequate sampling and/or indeterminate cytology, and operator dependency.11⇓⇓⇓⇓–16 The development of accurate and reliable US-based criteria to predict malignancy would decrease the need for FNA.

High-resolution thyroid US has been widely used in the evaluation of thyroid nodules, resulting in the establishment and general acceptance of certain characteristics that mark benign and malignant thyroid nodules.1⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–10 On the basis of previous studies, US findings suggestive of a solid malignant nodule include marked hypoechogenicity, spiculated margin, microcalcifications, and a taller-than-wide shape.1⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–8,10,11 Malignant US findings of a PCTN are considered different from those of a solid nodule and include an eccentric configuration with an acute angle, microcalcifications, macrolobulation or irregularity of the free margin, perinodular infiltration, and a centripetal vascularity in the pedicle.9,17 Several researchers have suggested that associated cervical lymphadenopathy with intranodal cystic components or microcalcifications should be added to this list as one of the malignant US features of both solid nodules and PCTNs.13,17⇓–19

This study is not the first to attempt to use a US-based diagnosis or classification as the sole method to assess or manage thyroid nodules.1,4,17 To the best of our knowledge, however, no other study has used a distinct classification system for solid and partially cystic thyroid nodules, respectively. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and feasibility of using a US-based classification system as a diagnostic technique to predict whether solid or partially cystic thyroid nodules are malignant or benign.

Materials and Methods

Patients

From January 2008 to December 2009, 1036 patients (876 women and 160 men; mean age, 49.0 ± 12.0 years) who underwent thyroid US were enrolled in our study. Each underwent US-FNA for ≥1 thyroid nodule ≥5 mm in the largest diameter. We obtained informed written consent from all patients, and the study was approved by the institutional review board.

Thyroid US

Real-time thyroid US was performed by an experienced radiologist by using a high-resolution sonographic instrument (iU 22; Philips Healthcare, Bothell, Washington) equipped with a 12- to 5-MHz linear probe. Thyroid nodules were placed in 1 of 2 categories: solid thyroid nodules, defined as purely solid or as predominantly solid with any cystic component accounting for <10% of the total volume; and PCTNs, defined as thyroid nodules with a cystic component accounting for ≥10% of the total volume.

For solid thyroid nodules, the US features that we used to indicate benignancy included an ovoid shape, isoechogenicity, a smooth margin, and peripheral vascularity. The US features of solid thyroid nodules that we termed borderline included hypoechogenicity; centrally predominant vascularity; and macrocalcifications, such as eggshell calcification and intranodular macrocalcifications, the latter defined as a nodule with macrocalcifications diffusely scattered over one-third of the entire nodule volume. Solid thyroid nodules diagnosed as malignant were characterized by marked hypoechogenicity, a spiculated margin, microcalcifications, taller-than-wide shape, and associated cervical lymphadenopathy with intranodal cystic components or microcalcifications. For PCTNs, the US features of a benign nodule included a configuration that was either concentric or eccentric with a blunt angle, a smooth free margin, peripheral or no vascularity, a spongiform appearance or daughter cysts in the solid component, intranodular comet-tail artifacts, and isoechogenicity. The US features of a malignant PCTN included an eccentric configuration of the main solid or cystic component with an acute angle, microcalcifications, macrolobulation or irregularity of the free margin, perinodular infiltration, a centripetal vascularity in the pedicle, and associated cervical lymphadenopathy showing intranodal cystic components or microcalcifications. The associated cervical lymphadenopathy criterion was applied only to a dominant thyroid nodule, defined as the thyroid nodule most likely to be malignant among all the nodules in a given patient on thyroid US.

Nodule Classification

Different criteria for US-based diagnosis of thyroid nodules were defined for the type of nodule (solid or partially cystic) (Fig 1). The US-based diagnostic criteria for solid thyroid nodules were as follows: 1) benign (SN-US class I): solid thyroid nodules with ≥3 US features of benignancy and no malignant or borderline US features; 2) probably benign (SN-US class II): solid thyroid nodules with 1 or 2 US features of benignancy and no malignant or borderline US features; 3) borderline (SN-US class III): solid thyroid nodules with ≥1 borderline US feature and no US features of malignancy, regardless of benign US features; 4) possibly malignant (SN-US class IV): solid thyroid nodules with 1 US feature of malignancy, regardless of borderline or benign US features; 5) malignant (SN-US class V): solid thyroid nodules with ≥2 US features of malignancy, regardless of borderline or benign US features. The criteria underlying the US diagnosis of PCTNs were as follows: 1) benign (PCTN-US class I): PCTNs with ≥3 US features of benignancy and no features of malignancy; 2) probably benign (PCTN-US class II): PCTNs with 1 or 2 US features of benignancy and no features of malignancy; 3) possibly malignant (PCTN-US class III): PCTNs with 1 US feature of malignancy, regardless of other benign features; 4) malignant (PCTN-US class IV): PCTNs with ≥2 US features of malignancy, regardless of other benign features.

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Classification system for US-based diagnosis of thyroid nodules.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

US diagnoses, cytologic diagnoses in initial US-FNA, and histopathologic results in 505 resected thyroid nodulesa

US-FNA and Cytologic Analysis

US-FNA was performed immediately after thyroid US examination by the same radiologist. All 1036 patients underwent US-FNA; collectively, they had 1289 nodules (nodule size range, 0.5–9.8 cm; mean size, 1.5 cm). We used the criterion recommended by the Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology to determine which nodules were eligible for US-FNA examination (largest diameter, ≥5 mm) rather than the American Thyroid Association guidelines (largest diameter, ≥10 mm).13 For each sample, smears were prepared on 4–6 slides, fixed in 95% ethanol, and were examined after Papanicolaou staining. For PCTNs, cytologic analysis was performed on the remaining aspirate in the syringe.

The cytologic analysis was categorized as follows: 1) inadequate (Bethesda class I), 2) benign (Bethesda class II), 3) indeterminate (Bethesda class III), 4) follicular neoplasm (Bethesda class IV), 5) suspicious for malignancy (Bethesda class V), and 6) positive for malignancy (Bethesda class VI). The cytologic results were deemed inadequate when fewer than 6 clusters of thyroid follicular cells containing no identifiable colloid were observed in a preparation. Nodular goiter, nodular goiter with hyperplastic nodules, colloid nodules, cyst contents with or without benign follicular cells, and lymphocytic thyroiditis were classified as benign cytology. Cytology was termed “indeterminate” in the specimens with atypical cells or follicular cells of undetermined significance. Cellular specimens with abundant follicular cells arranged in a microfollicular pattern with little or no colloid or cellular specimens with a predominant Hurthle cell population were reported as follicular neoplasms. Specimens were considered suspicious for malignancy if they demonstrated features of a malignant neoplasm that were quantitatively or qualitatively insufficient to make a definite diagnosis of malignancy. Specimens showing abundant cells with malignant cytologic features were positive for malignancy.

Statistical Analysis

Thyroid nodules that were diagnosed as benign or probably benign were classified as negative (benign), while those that were diagnosed as possibly malignant and malignant were classified as positive (malignant). We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and the accuracy of US diagnoses and compared these with histopathologic results for solid nodules and PCTNs. Then, borderline solid nodules were excluded and reclassified as either benign or malignant, before comparing all results by either the McNemar or the χ2 test. A P value < .05 was considered statistically significant. Data analyses were performed by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows (Version 17.0; SPSS, Chicago, Illinois).

Results

One thousand fifty-five solid nodules were prospectively classified as benign (n = 435), probably benign (n = 213), borderline (n = 94), possibly malignant (n = 115), and malignant (n = 198) (Fig 2). Similarly, 234 PCTNs were prospectively diagnosed as benign (n = 179), probably benign (n = 25), possibly malignant (n = 15), and malignant (n = 15) (Fig 3). Of 1289 thyroid nodules, 1193 (92.6%; solid [94.5%, 997/1055] and PCTN [83.8%, 196/234]) were adequately sampled by US-FNA. Cytologic results for 1289 nodules included 795 benign, 91 suspicious for malignancy, 229 malignant, 51 indeterminate, and 27 follicular tumors. A total of 505 thyroid nodules (451 solid nodules and 54 PCTNs) were surgically resected due to cytologic malignancy in the initial US-FNA (n = 281), the presence of coexisting thyroid malignancy (n = 91), cytologic malignancy in the repeat US-FNA (n = 15), indeterminate cytology (n = 35), follicular neoplasm cytology (n = 15), the presence of a large palpable mass with benign cytology (n = 49), or patient request (n = 19). Among these resected nodules, there were 299 papillary thyroid carcinomas, 9 follicular thyroid carcinomas, 3 medullary thyroid carcinomas, 1 anaplastic thyroid carcinoma, 1 metastasis due to renal cell carcinoma, 1 poorly differentiated carcinoma, 23 follicular adenomas, and 168 nodular hyperplasias. The US diagnoses, cytologic results, and histopathologic results of 505 resected thyroid nodules are summarized in Table 1.

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Representative sonographic images of the 5 diagnostic categories for solid thyroid nodules. A, Benign: longitudinal US image, in a 62-year-old man, of a right thyroid nodule (2.2 × 2.7 × 3.1 cm) with an ovoid shape, isoechogenicity, and smooth margin (nodular hyperplasia by pathology). B, Probably benign: transverse US image, in a 31-year-old woman, of a large left thyroid nodule (3.2 × 4.9 × 7.3 cm) with an ovoid shape, inhomogeneous isoechogenicity, and macrolobulated margin (trabecular variant of follicular adenoma by pathology). C, Borderline: longitudinal US image, in a 47-year-old woman, of a right thyroid nodule (1.0 × 1.2 × 1.6 cm) with hypoechogenicity, smooth margin, and an ovoid shape (oncocytic variant of follicular adenoma by pathology). D, Possibly malignant: longitudinal US image, in a 60-year-old woman, of a right thyroid nodule (2.0 × 2.5 × 2.7 cm) with isoechogenicity, macrolobulated margin, and taller-than-wide shape (follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma by pathology). E, Malignant: longitudinal US image in a 36-year-old woman of a left thyroid nodule (1.1 × 1.2 × 1.3 cm) with a round shape, marked hypoechogenicity, microlobulated margin, microcalcifications, and associated lymph nodes with intranodal cystic component or microcalcifications in the left inferior perithyroidal region (arrows) (classic type of papillary thyroid carcinoma by pathology).

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

Representative sonographic images of the 4 diagnostic categories for PCTNs. A, Benign: transverse US image of a right isthmic thyroid nodule (1.1 × 1.7 × 1.8 cm) showing an ovoid shape, isoechogenic and smooth-margined solid component, and a centrally and eccentrically located cystic component in a 30-year-old woman. The nodule was surgically resected because of coexisting thyroid malignancy (nodular hyperplasia by pathology). B, Probably benign: transverse US image of a right thyroid nodule (1.9 × 2.4 × 2.5 cm) showing an eccentric configuration with a blunt angle between the solid and cystic components (arrows) and an isoechoic solid component with a smooth margin in a 36-year-old woman. The nodule was surgically resected because of coexisting thyroid malignancy (nodular hyperplasia by pathology). C, Possibly malignant: transverse US image of a right thyroid nodule (1.9 × 2.1 × 2.2 cm) showing an eccentric configuration with an acute angle between the solid and cystic components (arrows) and an isoechoic solid component with a microlobulated margin in a 41-year-old man (nodular hyperplasia by pathology). D, Malignant: longitudinal US image of a left thyroid nodule (0.9 × 1.0 × 1.1 cm) showing an eccentric configuration with an acute angle between the solid and cystic components (arrows) and some microcalcifications in the solid component in a 36-year-old woman (classic type of papillary thyroid carcinoma by pathology).

After excluding 44 of the resected solid nodules that were diagnosed as borderline, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of US diagnoses in differentiating malignant from benign nodules were 86.0, 90.0, 93.1, 78.6, and 86.8%, respectively. Furthermore, after we divided the nonborderline resected nodules into solid and PCTN categories, 451 solid nodules were included in the analysis. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of US diagnoses in differentiating malignant from benign nodules among solid nodules were 86.1, 90.0, 94.3, 77.3, and 87.5%, respectively, and 66.7, 88.9, 75.0, 84.2, and 81.5%, respectively, among the PCTNs (Table 2). The diagnostic efficacy of thyroid US when borderline nodules were excluded did not differ significantly from that when the same nodules were reclassified as malignant (P = .389, McNemar test), but it significantly differed from that obtained when the same nodules with a borderline US diagnosis were reclassified as benign (P = .001, McNemar test). The diagnostic indices of individual US diagnostic classes for the resected nodules are shown in Table 3. The diagnostic accuracy for nodules in SN-US class I, SN-US class II, SN-US class V, PCTN-US class I, and PCTN-US class IV was significantly higher than that for nodules in other US classes.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Diagnostic indices of US diagnoses for the resected nodules

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3:

Diagnostic indices of individual US classes for 505 resected nodules

The US features of the 44 surgically resected nodules that were classified as borderline by US are listed in Table 4. We found a high incidence of hypoechogenicity (14/44, 31.8%) and eggshell calcification (23/44, 52.3%), as well as a high malignancy rate (65.9%, 29/44). The US features of the 23 nodules with eggshell calcification were retrospectively reviewed. Two eggshell nodules simultaneously showed 2 subfindings: 1 nodule showed interrupted eggshell and thick hypoechoic outer rim and the other nodule showed thickening of eggshell and a thick hypoechoic outer rim.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4:

US findings and histopathologic results in 44 resected nodules with borderline US categorya

Discussion

The US criteria that we used in this study for assessment of solid nodules were based on a number of previous studies,1⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–8 but different US criteria for PCTNs were predicated on the theory that a malignant PCTN originates from the wall of a thyroid cyst.20 Some US features that are associated with malignancy in a solid thyroid nodule include marked hypoechogenicity, a spiculated margin, microcalcifications, taller-than-wide shape, and associated cervical lymphadenopathy with intranodal cystic components or microcalcifications,1⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–10,18,19 whereas those associated with malignant PCTNs have an eccentric configuration with an acute angle, microcalcifications within a solid component, macrolobulated or irregular free margin of the solid component, perinodular infiltration, a centripetal vascularity in the pedicle, and associated cervical lymphadenopathy with intranodal cystic components or microcalcifications.9,17⇓–19 In addition, the possibility of malignancy or benignancy for thyroid nodules is considered to be related to the number of malignant or benign US features.17,21,22 In particular, Kwak et al21 examined the risk stratification of thyroid malignancy by using similar US features such as those used in our study; this study showed that the risk of malignancy increased with an increase in the number of suspicious US features.

Kim et al1 believed that US features predicting malignant solid nodules include marked hypoechogenicity, microcalcifications, microlobulated margin, and taller-than-wide shape. They reported that the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of US diagnosis were 93.8, 66.0, 56.1 95.9, and 74.8%, respectively when cytopathologic diagnoses of 155 solid nodules were used as a reference standard. Our results demonstrated that the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of US diagnosis by using only histopathologic diagnoses of 451 solid nodules were 86.1, 90.0, 94.3, 77.3, and 87.5%, respectively, which suggest that the diagnostic accuracy of US is high. In addition, all diagnostic indices were high regardless of exclusion or inclusion of borderline nodules. We suppose that the high diagnostic efficacy, regardless of the category of the borderline nodules, was related to the high malignancy rate of resected borderline nodules.

Recently, Horvath et al22 showed that a US-based reporting system improved patient management and cost-effectiveness by helping avoid unnecessary FNA. Only a small percentage of their results (21.0%, 230/1097) were surgically confirmed, however, with histologic analysis by US-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy being used as the reference standard in most cases. Furthermore, their diagnosis was based on retrospectively reviewed US features from limited US images, rather than real-time US. In contrast, we used real-time US as the diagnostic tool and histopathologic results of resected thyroid nodules as our reference standard. In addition, solid thyroid nodules were prospectively classified into 1 of 5 categories (SN-US classes I–V), and PCTNs were grouped into 1 of 4 categories according to their US features (PCTN-US classes I–IV).

Previously, we used an US-based classification to demonstrate that prospective studies that used 5 US categories for solid thyroid nodules and 4 US categories for PCTNs have a high diagnostic efficacy.17,23 However, this study showed the diagnostic accuracy of US for thyroid nodules on a larger scale, correlated these with histopathologic results, and attempted to use a different US classification system for solid nodules versus PCTNs. The diagnostic accuracies for nodules in SN-US class I, SN-US class II, SN-US class III, SN-US class V, PCTN-US class I, and PCTN-US class IV are considerably higher than those for SN-US class IV, PCTN-US class II, and PCTN-US class III. In addition, all of the specificities of individual US diagnostic classes for solid nodules and PCTNs were considerably high, but all of the sensitivities were relatively low.

The usefulness of hypoechogenicity, macrocalcifications, and centrally predominant vascularity as characteristics that predict malignancy for solid nodules has been debated.2⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–8,11⇓–13,24,25 Nonetheless, we used these characteristics to classify nodules as borderline malignancy. The nodules that we classified as borderline had a high incidence of malignancy (65.9%, 29/44). Of 44 borderline nodules, 23 had eggshell calcification, and they showed a high incidence of malignancy (60.9%, 14/23). On the basis of retrospective US image analysis, 14 malignant nodules with an eggshell calcification had either an interrupted eggshell (10/14, 71.4%) or a thick hypoechoic outer rim (7/14, 50%), which concurs with studies that suggest that these 2 findings predict malignancy in eggshell-calcified nodules.24,25 Nevertheless, large-scale studies are needed to correctly predict the risk of malignancy in borderline nodules because of the high possibility that the 50 nonresected borderline nodules were benign in this study.

There are several limitations to our study. First, 784 thyroid nodules were not surgically confirmed and were not included in the calculation of the diagnostic efficacy of US diagnosis. In addition, 62 nodules with suspicious cytology were not surgically removed due to patient loss and/or patient refusal of thyroid surgery. Furthermore, there was a high incidence of papillary thyroid carcinoma (95.2%, 299/314), which may introduce a bias because generally accepted malignant US features are not helpful for diagnosing follicular carcinoma.26,27 Finally, all US evaluations were performed by a single radiologist. Therefore, large-scale multicenter studies are recommended to ensure reproducibility.

Conclusions

We tested a simple easy-to-use US-based classification system for thyroid nodules and found it to be effective in differentiating malignant and benign nodules. In addition, to be very specific for all classes of nodules, we report that this system has a high degree of accuracy in diagnosing solid and partially cystic thyroid nodules.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Kim EK,
    2. Park CS,
    3. Chung WY,
    4. et al
    . New sonographic criteria for recommending fine-needle aspiration biopsy of nonpalpable solid nodules of the thyroid. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178: 687–91
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Moon WJ,
    2. Jung SL,
    3. Lee JH,
    4. et al
    . Benign and malignant thyroid nodules: US differentiation—multicenter retrospective study. Radiology 2008; 247: 762–70
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Frates MC,
    2. Benson CB,
    3. Doubilet PM,
    4. et al
    . Prevalence and distribution of carcinoma in patients with solitary and multiple thyroid nodules on sonography. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006; 91: 3411–17
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Hong YJ,
    2. Son EJ,
    3. Kim EK,
    4. et al
    . Positive predictive values of sonographic features of solid thyroid nodule. Clin Imaging 2010; 34: 127–33
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Koike E,
    2. Noguchi S,
    3. Yamashita H,
    4. et al
    . Ultrasonographic characteristics of thyroid nodules: prediction of malignancy. Arch Surg 2001; 136: 334–37
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Iannuccilli JD,
    2. Cronan JJ,
    3. Monchik JM
    . Risk for malignancy of thyroid nodules as assessed by sonographic criteria: the need for biopsy. J Ultrasound Med 2004; 23: 1455–64
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Frates MC,
    2. Benson CB,
    3. Doubilet PM,
    4. et al
    . Can color Doppler sonography aid in the prediction of malignancy of thyroid nodules? J Ultrasound Med 2003; 22: 127–31
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Papini E,
    2. Guglielmi R,
    3. Bianchini A,
    4. et al
    . Risk of malignancy in nonpalpable thyroid nodules: predictive value of ultrasound and color-Doppler features. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002; 87: 1941–46
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Lee MJ,
    2. Kim EK,
    3. Kwak JY,
    4. et al
    . Partially cystic thyroid nodules on ultrasound: probability of malignancy and sonographic differentiation. Thyroid 2009; 19: 341–46
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Shimura H,
    2. Haraguchi K,
    3. Hiejima Y,
    4. et al
    . Distinct diagnostic criteria for ultrasonographic examination of papillary thyroid carcinoma: a multicenter study. Thyroid 2005; 15: 251–58
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Frates MC,
    2. Benson CB,
    3. Charboneau JW,
    4. et al
    . Management of thyroid nodules detected at US: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Radiology 2005; 237: 794–800
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Cooper DS,
    2. Doherty GM,
    3. Haugen BR,
    4. et al
    . for the American Thyroid Association (ATA) Guidelines Taskforce on Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer. Revised American Thyroid Association management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid 2009; 19: 1167–214
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Moon WJ,
    2. Baek JH,
    3. Jung SL,
    4. et al
    . Ultrasonography and ultrasound-based management of thyroid nodules: consensus statement and recommendations. Korean J Radiol 2011; 12: 1–14
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. O'Malley ME,
    2. Weir MM,
    3. Hahn PF,
    4. et al
    . US-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of thyroid nodules: adequacy of cytologic material and procedure time with and without immediate cytologic analysis. Radiology 2002; 222: 383–87
    PubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. MacDonald L,
    2. Yazdi HM
    . Nondiagnostic fine needle aspiration biopsy of the thyroid gland: a diagnostic dilemma. Acta Cytol 1996; 40: 423–28
    PubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Yoon JH,
    2. Kwak JY,
    3. Kim EK,
    4. et al
    . How to approach thyroid nodules with indeterminate cytology. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17: 2147–55
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Kim DW,
    2. Lee EJ,
    3. In HS,
    4. et al
    . Sonographic differentiation of partially cystic thyroid nodules: a prospective study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010; 31: 1961–66. Epub 2010 Jul 15
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Ahuja AT,
    2. Chow L,
    3. Chick W,
    4. et al
    . Metastatic cervical nodes in papillary carcinoma of the thyroid: ultrasound and histological correlation. Clin Radiol 1995; 50: 229–31
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Kessler A,
    2. Rappaport Y,
    3. Blank A,
    4. et al
    . Cystic appearance of cervical lymph nodes is characteristic of metastatic papillary thyroid carcinoma. J Clin Ultrasound 2003; 31: 21–25
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Yokozawa T,
    2. Miyauchi A,
    3. Kuma K,
    4. et al
    . Accurate and simple method of diagnosing thyroid nodules by the modified technique of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Thyroid 1995; 5: 141–45
    PubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Kwak JY,
    2. Han KH,
    3. Yoon JH,
    4. et al
    . Thyroid imaging reporting and data system for US features of nodules: a step in establishing better stratification of cancer risk. Radiology 2011; 260: 892–99
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Horvath E,
    2. Majlis S,
    3. Rossi R,
    4. et al
    . An ultrasonogram reporting system for thyroid nodules stratifying cancer risk for clinical management. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009; 94: 1748–51
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Lee YH,
    2. Kim DW,
    3. In HS,
    4. et al
    . Differentiation of benign and malignant solid thyroid nodules using an US classification system. Korean J Radiol 2011; 12: 559–67
    CrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Kim BM,
    2. Kim MJ,
    3. Kim EK,
    4. et al
    . Sonographic differentiation of thyroid nodules with eggshell calcifications. J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27: 1425–30
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Park M,
    2. Shin JH,
    3. Han BK,
    4. et al
    . Sonography of thyroid nodules with peripheral calcifications. J Clin Ultrasound 2009; 37: 324–28
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Jeh SK,
    2. Jung SL,
    3. Kim BS,
    4. et al
    . Evaluating the degree of conformity of papillary carcinoma and follicular carcinoma to the reported ultrasonographic findings of malignant thyroid tumor. Korean J Radiol 2007; 8: 192–97
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Fukunari N,
    2. Nagahama M,
    3. Sugino K,
    4. et al
    . Clinical evaluation of color Doppler imaging for the differential diagnosis of thyroid follicular lesions. World J Surg 2004; 28: 1261–65
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received July 31, 2011.
  • Accepted after revision September 16, 2011.
  • © 2012 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 33 (6)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 33, Issue 6
1 Jun 2012
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Ultrasound-Based Diagnostic Classification for Solid and Partially Cystic Thyroid Nodules
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
D.W. Kim, J.S. Park, H.S. In, H.J. Choo, J.H. Ryu, S.J. Jung
Ultrasound-Based Diagnostic Classification for Solid and Partially Cystic Thyroid Nodules
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jun 2012, 33 (6) 1144-1149; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2923

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Ultrasound-Based Diagnostic Classification for Solid and Partially Cystic Thyroid Nodules
D.W. Kim, J.S. Park, H.S. In, H.J. Choo, J.H. Ryu, S.J. Jung
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jun 2012, 33 (6) 1144-1149; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2923
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Sonographically Based Diagnosis of Contralateral Malignancy in Preoperative Patients With Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma
  • Crossref (45)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • ACR Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS): White Paper of the ACR TI-RADS Committee
    Franklin N. Tessler, William D. Middleton, Edward G. Grant, Jenny K. Hoang, Lincoln L. Berland, Sharlene A. Teefey, John J. Cronan, Michael D. Beland, Terry S. Desser, Mary C. Frates, Lynwood W. Hammers, Ulrike M. Hamper, Jill E. Langer, Carl C. Reading, Leslie M. Scoutt, A. Thomas Stavros
    Journal of the American College of Radiology 2017 14 5
  • 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 Appendix
    Hossein Gharib, Enrico Papini, Jeffrey R. Garber, Daniel S. Duick, R. Mack Harrell, Laszlo Hegedus, Ralf Paschke, Roberto Valcavi, Paolo Vitti
    Endocrine Practice 2016 22
  • Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS): A User’s Guide
    Franklin N. Tessler, William D. Middleton, Edward G. Grant
    Radiology 2018 287 1
  • Balancing the benefits and harms of thyroid cancer surveillance in survivors of Childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer: Recommendations from the international Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group in collaboration with the PanCareSurFup Consortium
    S.C. Clement, L.C.M. Kremer, F.A. Verburg, J.H. Simmons, M. Goldfarb, R.P. Peeters, E.K. Alexander, E. Bardi, E. Brignardello, L.S. Constine, C.A. Dinauer, V.M. Drozd, F. Felicetti, E. Frey, A. Heinzel, M.M. van den Heuvel-Eibrink, S.A. Huang, T.P. Links, K. Lorenz, R.L. Mulder, S.J. Neggers, E.J.M. Nieveen van Dijkum, K.C. Oeffinger, R.R. van Rijn, S.A. Rivkees, C.M. Ronckers, A.B. Schneider, R. Skinner, J.D. Wasserman, T. Wynn, M.M. Hudson, P.C. Nathan, H.M. van Santen
    Cancer Treatment Reviews 2018 63
  • Application of wavelet techniques for cancer diagnosis using ultrasound images: A Review
    Vidya K Sudarshan, Muthu Rama Krishnan Mookiah, U Rajendra Acharya, Vinod Chandran, Filippo Molinari, Hamido Fujita, Kwan Hoong Ng
    Computers in Biology and Medicine 2016 69
  • Diagnostic reliability of the Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS) in routine practice
    Allen San Shell Jabar, Prakashini Koteshwara, Jasbon Andrade
    Polish Journal of Radiology 2019 84
  • Clasificación TI-RADS de los nódulos tiroideos en base a una escala de puntuación modificada con respecto a los criterios ecográficos de malignidad
    J. Fernández Sánchez
    Revista Argentina de Radiología 2014 78 3
  • Inter-exam agreement and diagnostic performance of the Korean thyroid imaging reporting and data system for thyroid nodule assessment: Real-time versus static ultrasonography
    Jung Min Bae, Soo Yeon Hahn, Jung Hee Shin, Eun Young Ko
    European Journal of Radiology 2018 98
  • Association of Xerostomia and Ultrasonographic Features of the Major Salivary Glands After Radioactive Iodine Ablation for Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
    Sang Soo Roh, Dong Wook Kim, Hye Jin Baek
    American Journal of Roentgenology 2016 207 5
  • Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and utility of artificial intelligence–optimized ACR TI-RADS and original ACR TI-RADS: a multi-center validation study based on 2061 thyroid nodules
    Ying Liu, Xiaoxian Li, Cuiju Yan, Longzhong Liu, Ying Liao, Hongyan Zeng, Weijun Huang, Qian Li, Nansheng Tao, Jianhua Zhou
    European Radiology 2022 32 11

More in this TOC Section

  • Chondrosarcoma vs Synovial Chondromatosis: Imaging
  • WHO Classification Update: Nasal&Skull Base Tumors
  • Peritumoral Signal in Vestibular Schwannomas
Show more Head & Neck

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner
  • Book Reviews

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire