|
Application of ultrasound-based thyroid imaging reporting and data system for assessing thyroid nodules with suspected malignancy
|
Y. Wu   , D. Liu , Y. Zhou , X. Xin , A. Guo |
| Physical Examination Center, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050000, Hebei Province, China , ainanguo902@163.com |
|
|
Abstract: (357 Views) |
Background: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Kwak Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS) in preoperatively identifying suspicious malignant thyroid nodules (MTNs) and to investigate size-dependent ultrasound features associated with malignancy. Materials and Methods: This study reviewed 155 patients (212 nodules suspected of thyroid cancer) who underwent surgical treatment at The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University between June 2015 and December 2019. Preoperative ultrasound findings were classified using the Kwak TI-RADS system based on five features: solid composition, hypoechogenicity, irregular/lobulated margin, aspect ratio ≥1, and microcalcifications. Nodules were categorized into TI-RADS 3–5, with histopathology serving as the diagnostic benchmark. The positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated. Additionally, ultrasonographic characteristics of papillary malignant nodules (≤1 cm) were compared to those of larger malignant nodules (>1 cm). Results: Of the 212 nodules, histopathology identified 193 as malignant and 19 as benign. The TI-RADS demonstrated a PPV of 96.94%, sensitivity of 98.45%, specificity of 68.42%, NPV of 81.25%, and accuracy of 95.75%. Size-stratified analysis revealed distinct imaging phenotypes: microcarcinomas (n = 119) were more frequently associated with an aspect ratio ≥1 (80.67%) and microcalcifications (57.98%), while larger malignant nodules (n = 74) exhibited higher rates of coarse calcifications (24.32%) and increased vascularity (grade 2/3: 32.43%). The two groups showed significant differences in aspect ratio, type of calcification, and vascularity (p<0.01). Conclusion: The TI RADS classification effectively predicts the diagnosis of suspicious MTN. |
|
| Keywords: Thyroid nodule, microcarcinomas, ultrasonography, classification system, diagnosis, differential, retrospective studies. |
|
|
Full-Text [PDF 1191 kb]
(110 Downloads)
|
|
Type of Study: Original Research |
Subject:
Radiation Biology
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| References |
1. 1. Han D, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Pei Y, Huang X, Qin L, et al. (2025) Analysis of the detection rate and related factors of thyroid nodules in the healthy population. Open Life Sci, 20(1): 20251079. [ DOI:10.1515/biol-2025-1079] 2. Shimura H, Yokoya S, Suzuki S, Iwadate M, Suzuki S, Matsuzuka T, et al. (2023) Confounding factors and biases involved in regional differences in the detection rate of thyroid cancer in the second-round thyroid ultrasound examination: the Fukushima health management survey. J Radiat Res, 64(5): 761-8. [ DOI:10.1093/jrr/rrad044] 3. Sharma R, Kumar Mahanti G, Panda G, Singh A (2023) Thyroid nodules classification using weighted average ensemble and D-CRITIC based TOPSIS methods for ultrasound images. Curr Med Imaging, 10.2174/1573405620666230405085358. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.2174/1573405620666230405085358 [ DOI:10.2174/15734056206662304050853 58] 4. Angell TE, Maurer R, Wang Z, Kim MI, Alexander CA, Barletta JA, et al. (2019) A cohort analysis of clinical and ultrasound variables predicting cancer risk in 20,001 consecutive thyroid nodules. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 104(11): 5665-72. [ DOI:10.1210/jc.2019-00664] 5. Wang X, Niu Y, Liu H, Tian F, Zhang Q, Wang Y, et al. (2025) ThyroNet-X4 genesis: an advanced deep learning model for auxiliary diagnosis of thyroid nodules' malignancy. Sci Rep, 15(1): 4214. [ DOI:10.1038/s41598-025-86819-w] 6. Xia M, Song F, Zhao Y, Xie Y, Wen Y, Zhou P (2023) Ultrasonography-based radiomics and computer-aided diagnosis in thyroid nodule management: performance comparison and clinical strategy optimization. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne), 14: 1140816. [ DOI:10.3389/fendo.2023.1140816] 7. Nie W, Zhu L, Yan P, Sun J (2022) Thyroid nodule ultrasound accuracy in predicting thyroid malignancy based on TIRADS system. Adv Clin Exp Med, 31(6): 597-606. [ DOI:10.17219/acem/146776] 8. Gürsel BE, Çağlar B, Özpar R, Saraydaroğlu Ö, Gökalp G, Topal NB (2024) Multimodal ultrasonography evaluation in thyroid nodule characterization: what is the ideal algorithm? Med Ultrason, 26(1): 41-9. [ DOI:10.11152/mu-4325] 9. Russ G (2016) Risk stratification of thyroid nodules on ultrasonography with the French TI-RADS: description and reflections. Ultrasonography, 35(1): 25-38. [ DOI:10.14366/usg.15027] 10. Wang Y, Lei KR, He YP, Li XL, Ren WW, Zhao CK, et al. (2017) Malignancy risk stratification of thyroid nodules: comparisons of four ultrasound Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data Systems in surgically resected nodules. Sci Rep, 7(1): 11560. [ DOI:10.1038/s41598-017-11863-0] 11. Kang YJ, Stybayeya G, Lee JE, Hwang SH (2022) Diagnostic performance of ACR and Kwak TI-RADS for benign and malignant thyroid nodules: An update systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel), 14(23): 5961. [ DOI:10.3390/cancers14235961] 12. Topcuoglu OM, Uzunoglu B, Orhan T, Basaran EB, Gormez A, Sarica O (2025) A real-world comparison of the diagnostic performances of six different TI-RADS guidelines, including ACR-/Kwak-/K-/EU-/ATA-/C-TIRADS. Clin Imaging, 117: 110366. [ DOI:10.1016/j.clinimag.2024.110366] 13. Qi TY, Chen X, Liu H, Mao L, Chen J, He BL, et al. (2022) Comparison of thyroid nodule FNA rates recommended by ACR TI-RADS, Kwak TI-RADS and ATA guidelines. Eur J Radiol, 148: 110152. [ DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110152] 14. Maia FF, Matos PS, Pavin EJ, Zantut-Wittmann DE (2015) Thyroid imaging reporting and data system score combined with Bethesda system for malignancy risk stratification in thyroid nodules with indeterminate results on cytology. Clin Endocrinol, 82(3): 439-44. [ DOI:10.1111/cen.12525] 15. Weiss MH (2021) In response to "Discriminating malignancy in thyroid nodules: The nomogram versus the Kwak and ACR TI-RADS". Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 165(5): 755-6. [ DOI:10.1177/01945998211002159] 16. Grani G, Sponziello M, Pecce V, Ramundo V, Durante C (2020) Contemporary thyroid nodule evaluation and management. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 105(9): 2869-83. [ DOI:10.1210/clinem/dgaa322] 17. Lim JY and Kuo JH (2022) Thyroid nodule radiofrequency ablation: Complications and clinical follow up. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol, 25(2): 100824. [ DOI:10.1016/j.tvir.2022.100824] 18. Chen Z, Du Y, Cheng L, Zhang Y, Zheng S, Li R, et al. (2022) Diagnostic performance of simplified TI-RADS for malignant thyroid nodules: comparison with 2017 ACR-TI-RADS and 2020 C-TI-RADS. Cancer Imaging, 22(1): 41. [ DOI:10.1186/s40644-022-00478-y] 19. Singaporewalla RM, Hwee J, Lang TU, Desai V (2017) Clinico-pathological correlation of thyroid nodule ultrasound and cytology using the TIRADS and Bethesda classifications. World J Surg, 41(7): 1807-11. [ DOI:10.1007/s00268-017-3919-5] 20. Okasha HH, Mansor M, Sheriba N, Assem M, Abdelfattah Y, Ashoush OA, et al. (2021) Role of elastography strain ratio and TIRADS score in predicting malignant thyroid nodule. Arch Endocrinol Metab, 64(6): 735-42. [ DOI:10.20945/2359-3997000000283] 21. Hong YR, Yan CX, Mo GQ, Luo ZY, Zhang Y, Wang Y, et al. (2015) Conventional US, elastography, and contrast enhanced US features of papillary thyroid microcarcinoma predict central compartment lymph node metastases. Sci Rep, 5: 7748. [ DOI:10.1038/srep07748] 22. Jung CK, Bychkov A, Kakudo K (2022) Update from the 2022 World Health Organization classification of thyroid tumors: A standardized diagnostic approach. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul), 37(5): 703-18. [ DOI:10.3803/EnM.2022.1553] 23. Li M, Wei L, Li F, Kan Y, Liang X, Zhang H, et al. (2021) High risk thyroid nodule discrimination and management by modified TI-RADS. Cancer Manag Res, 13: 225-34. [ DOI:10.2147/CMAR.S284370] 24. Fernández Velasco P, Pérez López P, Torres Torres B, Delgado E, de Luis D, Díaz Soto G (2024) Clinical evaluation of an artificial intelligence-based decision support system for the diagnosis and American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System classification of thyroid nodules. Thyroid, 34(4): 510-8. [ DOI:10.1089/thy.2023.0603] 25. Zhang F, Mei F, Chen W (2025) Development of a malignancy risk prediction model combining ultrasound and cytology for Bethesda category III thyroid nodules. World J Surg Oncol, 23(1): 438. [ DOI:10.1186/s12957-025-04095-4] 26. Sun CF, Wu D, Sun JY, Hou YL, Xin JW, Ru XC, et al. (2025) Diagnostic performance of ultrasound elastography alone and in combination with conventional ultrasonography for Bethesda III-IV thyroid nodules: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Quant Imaging Med Surg, 15(10): 9613-30. [ DOI:10.21037/qims-2025-553] 27. Vardarli I, Tan S, Görges R, Krämer BK, Herrmann K, Brochhausen C (2024) Diagnostic accuracy of Afirma gene expression classifier, Afirma gene sequencing classifier, ThyroSeq v2 and ThyroSeq v3 for indeterminate (Bethesda III and IV) thyroid nodules: a meta-analysis. Endocr Connect, 13(7): e240170. [ DOI:10.1530/EC-24-0170] |
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
|
Wu Y, Liu D, Zhou Y, Xin X, Guo A. Application of ultrasound-based thyroid imaging reporting and data system for assessing thyroid nodules with suspected malignancy. Int J Radiat Res 2026; 24 (3) :789-794 URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-7238-en.html
|
