切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华医学超声杂志(电子版) ›› 2017, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (04) : 263 -268. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2017.04.006

所属专题: 文献

浅表器官超声影像学

甲状腺结节的影像报告与数据系统分级与2015年美国甲状腺学会推荐超声恶性风险分层的比较研究
刘如玉1, 姜玉新1, 杨筱1, 王莹1, 高璐滢1, 刘佳1, 王娟娟1, 席雪华1, 朱沈玲1, 赖兴建1, 赵瑞娜1, 张晓燕1, 张波1,()   
  1. 1. 100730 中国医学科学院 北京协和医学院 北京协和医院超声医学科
  • 收稿日期:2017-01-18 出版日期:2017-04-01
  • 通信作者: 张波
  • 基金资助:
    国家国际科技合作专项项目(2015DFA30440); 首都卫生发展科研专项基金(2016-2-40110); 北京协和医学院2016教育教学改革项目(2016zlgc0108)

Comparison between thyroid imaging reporting and data system and the recommendation of 2015 American Thyroid Association in Evaluation of Thyroid Nodule with Ultrasound

Ruyu Liu1, Yuxin Jiang1, Xiao Yang1, Ying Wang1, Luying Gao1, Jia Liu1, Juanjuan Wang1, Xuehua Xi1, Shenling Zhu1, Xingjian Lai1, Ruina Zhao1, Xiaoyan Zhang1, Bo Zhang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Ultrasound, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing 100730, China
  • Received:2017-01-18 Published:2017-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Bo Zhang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Zhang Bo, Email:
引用本文:

刘如玉, 姜玉新, 杨筱, 王莹, 高璐滢, 刘佳, 王娟娟, 席雪华, 朱沈玲, 赖兴建, 赵瑞娜, 张晓燕, 张波. 甲状腺结节的影像报告与数据系统分级与2015年美国甲状腺学会推荐超声恶性风险分层的比较研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2017, 14(04): 263-268.

Ruyu Liu, Yuxin Jiang, Xiao Yang, Ying Wang, Luying Gao, Jia Liu, Juanjuan Wang, Xuehua Xi, Shenling Zhu, Xingjian Lai, Ruina Zhao, Xiaoyan Zhang, Bo Zhang. Comparison between thyroid imaging reporting and data system and the recommendation of 2015 American Thyroid Association in Evaluation of Thyroid Nodule with Ultrasound[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2017, 14(04): 263-268.

目的

分别采用甲状腺影像报告与数据系统(TI-RADS)与2015年美国甲状腺学会(ATA)《成人分化型甲状腺癌诊治指南》(简称ATA指南)推荐的超声特征对甲状腺结节进行恶性风险评估,并比较2种方法诊断甲状腺结节的价值。

方法

选取2011年11月至2015年12月在北京协和医院获得病理结果的331例甲状腺结节患者,共485个结节,96个良性,389个恶性。评估结节大小、结构、纵横比、边缘、回声,钙化及腺体外侵犯。以TI-RADS及ATA指南分级标准对结节进行分级,比较各分级的恶性百分比。并以病理为"金标准",取不同分级界值评估二者的诊断敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值及准确性。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线来确定TI-RADS与ATA分级的最佳临界值。并计算ATA指南与TI-RADS分级在最佳临界点诊断恶性时Kappa值。

结果

TI-RADS分级2、3、4a、4b、4c及5级结节恶性百分比分别为0、12.0%(3/25)、22.2%(10/45)、29.8%(14/47)、99.2%(261/263)及100%(101/101)。ATA指南分级的良性、极低危、低危、中危、高危恶性百分比分别为0、12.5%(1/8)、16.1%(10/62)、27.7%(13/47)及99.2%(365/368)。2种方法各自分级之间恶性百分比比较,差异均有统计学意义(χ2=344.96、348.68,P均<0.01),TI-RADS分级与恶性百分比的相关系数为0.71,ATA指南分级相关系数为0.85。TI-RADS与ATA指南分级ROC曲线下面积分别为0.966、0.959,最佳分界点为TI-RADS分级≥4c与ATA指南分级≥高危,且当以≥4c与≥高危作为TI-RADS分级、ATA指南分级诊断恶性标准时,敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值及准确性均数值较接近(93.1% vs 93.8%,97.9% vs 96.9%,99.5% vs 99.2%,77.7% vs 79.5%,94.0% vs 94.4%),差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05),Kappa值=0.97。

结论

TI-RADS与ATA分级对甲状腺结节的恶性风险评估诊断价值较高,以TI-RADS分级≥4c与ATA指南分级≥高危作为诊断恶性的标准时,二者诊断效率及一致性最高。

Objective

To compare diagnostic values of the 2015 American Thyroid Association (ATA) Management Guidelines for Adult Patients with Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer with the thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS) for sonographic malignancy risk stratification of thyroid nodules.

Methods

From November 2011 to December 2015, 485 thyroid nodules in 331 patients (mean age, 42.9 years±10.4)were included in this study. Characteristics includingsize, composition, shape(nonparallel or parallel), margin, echogenicity, calcifications and extrathyroidal extension of thyroid nodules were evaluated. Every nodule was stratificated by criteria set by TI-RADS and ATA guidelines, and malignant rate of each risk stratification were calculated and analysed. With pathology as the gold standard, different cutoff were taken to diagnose malignant nodules, and the sensitivity, specifity, positive predictive value, negativepredictive value and accuracy of the two methodologies were calculated at each cutoff. And the two methodologies were evaluated and measured by ROC curve.Finally their Kappa value were calculated at the best cutoff.

Results

Of the 485 thyroid nodules, 96 were benign and 389 were malignant. The malignancy rates under TI-RADS category 2, 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, and 5 nodules were 0, 12.0% (3/25), 22.2% (10/45), 29.8% (14/47), 99.2% (261/363) and 100% (101/101). Malignancy rates under ATA guidelines of benign, very low, low, intermediate, and high suspicion for malignancy were 0,12.5% (1/8), 16.1% (10/62), 27.7% (13/47), and 99.2% (365/368). There were significant differences inside each patterns (P<0.01) respectively and high correlation between risk stratification with TI-RADS (r=0.70) and ATA guidelines (r=0.83). Areas under the ROC curve of the TI-RADS and ATA guidelines classifications were 0.966 and 0.959. Best cut-off point for diagnosing malignant by TI-RADS and ATA guideline classifications were ≥4c and ≥high suspicion, and at that point, diagnostic value of TI-RADS and ATA guidelines were nearly the same(sensitivity, 93.1% vs 93.8%; specificity, 97.9% vs 96.9%; PPV, 99.5% vs 99.2%; NPV, 75.7%vs 79.5%; and accuracy, 94.0%vs 94.4%), and there was no significant differences (P=0.50, P=0.50, P=0.50, P=0.53, P=0.55), Kappa=0.97.

Conclusions

Both TI-RADS and the ATA guidelinesprovide effective malignancy risk stratification for thyroid nodules. The diagnosticvalue of TI-RADS when considering≥4c and ATA guidelines when considering ≥high-suspicion nodules as malignant were nearly the same and both high.

表1 332例甲状腺结节患者共495个结节超声特征[个(%)]
表2 485个甲状腺结节的TI-RADS分级与ATA指南分级恶性百分比
表3 TI-RADS与ATA指南不同分级诊断恶性甲状腺结节的诊断效率比较
图1 TI-RADS分级2至5级与ATA指南分级良性至高危评价甲状腺结节的ROC曲线
[1]
Guth S, Theune U, Aberle J, et al. Very high prevalence of thyroid nodules detected by high frequency (13 MHz) ultrasound examination [J]. Eur J Clin Invest, 2009, 39(8):699-706.
[2]
International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. GLOBOCAN 2012: estimated cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2012 [EB/OL]. [2016-08-18].

URL    
[3]
Jun P, Chow LC, Jeffrey RB. The sonographic features of papillary thyroid carcinomas: pictorial essay [J]. Ultrasound Q, 2005, 21(1):39-45.
[4]
Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association Management Guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer; The American Thyroid Association Management Guidelines Task Force on Thyroid nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer [J]. Thyroid, 2016, 26(1):1-133.
[5]
Horvath E, Majlis S, Rossi R, et al. An ultrasonogram reporting systemfor thyroid nodules stratifying cancer risk for clinical management [J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2009, 94(5):1748-1751.
[6]
Park JY, Lee HJ, Jang HW, et al. A proposal for a thyroid imaging reporting and data system for ultrasound features of thyroid carcinoma.[J]. Thyroid, 2009, 19(11):1257-1264.
[7]
Kwak JY, Han KH, Yoon JH, et al. Thyroid imaging reporting and data system for US features of nodules: astep in establishing better stratification of cancer risk [J]. Radiology, 2011, 260(3):892-899.
[8]
黄娴,邓莹远,黄蕾丹, 等. 不同甲状腺影像报告和数据系统在甲状腺结节分类诊断中的应用比较[J]. 放射学实践, 2016, 31(6):538-542.
[9]
Yoon JH, Lee HS, Kim EK, et al. Malignancy Risk Stratification of Thyroid Nodules: Comparison between the Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System and the 2014 American Thyroid Association Management Guidelines [J]. Radiology, 2016, 278(3):917-924.
[10]
陈梅,张克勤,毛锋. 探讨甲状腺影像报告和数据系统在评估甲状腺结节良恶性中的临床价[J]. 医学影像学杂志, 2016, 26(5):795-798.
[11]
Salmaslioğlu A, Erbil Y, Dural C, et al. Predictive value of sonographic features inpreoperative evaluation of malignant thyroidnodules in a multinodular goiter [J]. World JSurg, 2008, 32(9):1948-1954.
[12]
Chandramohan A, Khurana A, Pushpa BT, et al. Is TIRADS a practical and accurate system for use in daily clinical practice? [J]. Indian J Radiol Imaging, 2016, 26(1):145-152.
[1] 章建全, 程杰, 陈红琼, 闫磊. 采用ACR-TIRADS评估甲状腺消融区的调查研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 966-971.
[2] 罗辉, 方晔. 品管圈在提高甲状腺结节细针穿刺检出率中的应用[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(10): 972-977.
[3] 杨忠, 时敬业, 邓学东, 姜纬, 殷林亮, 潘琦, 梁泓, 马建芳, 王珍奇, 张俊, 董姗姗. 产前超声在胎儿22q11.2 微缺失综合征中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 852-858.
[4] 孙佳丽, 金琳, 沈崔琴, 陈晴晴, 林艳萍, 李朝军, 徐栋. 机器人辅助超声引导下经皮穿刺的体外实验研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(09): 884-889.
[5] 史学兵, 谢迎东, 谢霓, 徐超丽, 杨斌, 孙帼. 声辐射力弹性成像对不可切除肝细胞癌门静脉癌栓患者放射治疗效果的评价[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(08): 778-784.
[6] 刘畅, 蒋洁, 胥雪冬, 崔立刚, 王淑敏, 陈文. 北京市海淀区医疗机构甲状腺超声检查及TIRADS分类基线调查[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 693-697.
[7] 李洋, 蔡金玉, 党晓智, 常婉英, 巨艳, 高毅, 宋宏萍. 基于深度学习的乳腺超声应变弹性图像生成模型的应用研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 563-570.
[8] 洪玮, 叶细容, 刘枝红, 杨银凤, 吕志红. 超声影像组学联合临床病理特征预测乳腺癌新辅助化疗完全病理缓解的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 571-579.
[9] 项文静, 徐燕, 茹彤, 郑明明, 顾燕, 戴晨燕, 朱湘玉, 严陈晨. 神经学超声检查在产前诊断胼胝体异常中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 470-476.
[10] 胡可, 鲁蓉. 基于多参数超声特征的中老年女性压力性尿失禁诊断模型研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 477-483.
[11] 张妍, 原韶玲, 史泽洪, 郭馨阳, 牛菁华. 小肾肿瘤超声漏诊原因分析新思路[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 500-504.
[12] 席芬, 张培培, 孝梦甦, 刘真真, 张一休, 张璟, 朱庆莉, 孟华. 乳腺错构瘤的临床与超声影像学特征分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 505-510.
[13] 杨敬武, 周美君, 陈雨凡, 李素淑, 何燕妮, 崔楠, 刘红梅. 人工智能超声结合品管圈活动对低年资超声医师甲状腺结节风险评估能力的作用[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(05): 522-526.
[14] 钱警语, 郑明明. 《2024意大利妇产科学会非侵入性和侵入性产前诊断指南》解读[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 486-492.
[15] 张琛, 秦鸣, 董娟, 陈玉龙. 超声检查对儿童肠扭转缺血性改变的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 565-568.
阅读次数
全文


摘要