Article Figures & Data
Figures
- FIGURE.
Diagram depicting the overall study design.
Tables
- Table 1:
Lymph node evaluation by the sonographic predictive model (features of a predicted abnormal LN)a
Nonhomogeneous Echo Pattern Microcalcifications Volume (mm3) Present Present Any Absent or indeterminate Present ≥853 Present Absent or indeterminate ≥690 Absent or indeterminate Absent or indeterminate ≥2538 ↵a LN FNAB recommendation was based on the combination of features at a given volume threshold.
Variable Mean (SD) Median Min, Max Age (yr) 51.17 (13.49) 51.0 23, 78 Time since PTC diagnosis (yr) 6.07 (5.35) 4.5 0.23, 30.48 Note:—Min indicates minimum; Max, maximum.
Frequency (%) Women 76 (73.79%) Biopsy or operation performed 39 (37.86%) Positive for LN metastasis 21 (53.85%) No. of LNs evaluated on US 1 30 (29.13%) 2 36 (34.95%) 3 21 (20.39%) 4 11 (10.68%) 5 4 (3.88%) 8 1 (0.97%) - Table 4:
Frequencies of patient level (N = 103 participants) and lymph node level (N = 237 LNs) M and R method resultsa
Biopsy Positive for Metastasis Biopsy Negative for Metastasis Not Biopsied Total Person level Total participants 21 18 64 103 M Positive 17 6 13 36 Negative 4 12 51 67 R Positive 19 13 17 49 Negative 2 5 47 54 Lymph node level Total lymph lodes 33 40 164 237 M Positive 21 9 17 47 Negative 12 31 147 190 R Positive 24 26 37 87 Negative 9 14 127 150 ↵a For person level results, biopsy positive for metastasis indicates that the patient had at least 1 LN positive for metastasis, and positive M or R method indicates that the patient had at least 1 LN called positive by the respective method.
Results Method +R Method −R Method Positive for metastasis (33 LNs) +M method 17 4 −M method 7 5 Negative for metastasis (40 LNs) +M method 6 3 −M method 20 11 - Table 6:
Relative true-positive and relative false-positive rates for the M method compared with the R method (n = 54 LNs with pathology results in which at least 1 method, R or M, had positive findings)
Estimate (SE) 95% CI P Value rTPF M method 1.46 (0.20) 1.12–1.91 .01 rFPF M method 0.58 (0.14) 0.36–0.92 .02 Note:—SE, indicates standard error.
