Cargando…
Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience
Background: Several US risk stratification score systems (RSSs) have been developed to standardize a thyroid nodule risk of malignancy. It is still a matter of debate which RSS is the most reliable. The purpose of this study is to evaluate: (1) the concordance between the American College of Radiolo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9865358/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36675326 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12020398 |
_version_ | 1784875817706192896 |
---|---|
author | Amendola, Stefano Wolde Sellasie, Sium Pedicini, Francesco Carlini, Massimo Russo, Giulia Ossola, Nicola Leoncini, Andrea Botti, Flavia Bonanno, Elena Trimboli, Pierpaolo Uccioli, Luigi |
author_facet | Amendola, Stefano Wolde Sellasie, Sium Pedicini, Francesco Carlini, Massimo Russo, Giulia Ossola, Nicola Leoncini, Andrea Botti, Flavia Bonanno, Elena Trimboli, Pierpaolo Uccioli, Luigi |
author_sort | Amendola, Stefano |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Several US risk stratification score systems (RSSs) have been developed to standardize a thyroid nodule risk of malignancy. It is still a matter of debate which RSS is the most reliable. The purpose of this study is to evaluate: (1) the concordance between the American College of Radiology TI-RADS (ACR TI-RADS) and fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), (2) the cancer rate in the ACR TI-RADS categories, (3) the characteristics of nodules evaluated by FNAC even if not formally indicated according to ACR TI-RADS (‘not indicated FNACs”). Methods: From January 2021 to September 2022, patients attending the Endocrinology Unit of the CTO Hospital of Rome for evaluation of thyroid nodules were included. Results: 830 nodules had negative cytology, belonging to TIR2 and TIR1C. One hundred and thirteen nodules were determined to be suspicious for or consistent with malignancy belonging to TIR3B/TIR4/TIR5. Of this last group, 94% were classified as TR4/TR5 nodules. In total, 87/113 underwent surgery. Among these, 73 had histologically proven cancer, 14 turned out to be benign. “Not indicated FNACs” was 623. Among these, 42 cancers were present. Conclusions: This study confirmed the diagnostic power of ACR TI-RADS. In addition, these data suggest revising the ACR TI-RADS indication to FNAC, especially for TR4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9865358 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98653582023-01-22 Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience Amendola, Stefano Wolde Sellasie, Sium Pedicini, Francesco Carlini, Massimo Russo, Giulia Ossola, Nicola Leoncini, Andrea Botti, Flavia Bonanno, Elena Trimboli, Pierpaolo Uccioli, Luigi J Clin Med Article Background: Several US risk stratification score systems (RSSs) have been developed to standardize a thyroid nodule risk of malignancy. It is still a matter of debate which RSS is the most reliable. The purpose of this study is to evaluate: (1) the concordance between the American College of Radiology TI-RADS (ACR TI-RADS) and fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), (2) the cancer rate in the ACR TI-RADS categories, (3) the characteristics of nodules evaluated by FNAC even if not formally indicated according to ACR TI-RADS (‘not indicated FNACs”). Methods: From January 2021 to September 2022, patients attending the Endocrinology Unit of the CTO Hospital of Rome for evaluation of thyroid nodules were included. Results: 830 nodules had negative cytology, belonging to TIR2 and TIR1C. One hundred and thirteen nodules were determined to be suspicious for or consistent with malignancy belonging to TIR3B/TIR4/TIR5. Of this last group, 94% were classified as TR4/TR5 nodules. In total, 87/113 underwent surgery. Among these, 73 had histologically proven cancer, 14 turned out to be benign. “Not indicated FNACs” was 623. Among these, 42 cancers were present. Conclusions: This study confirmed the diagnostic power of ACR TI-RADS. In addition, these data suggest revising the ACR TI-RADS indication to FNAC, especially for TR4. MDPI 2023-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9865358/ /pubmed/36675326 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12020398 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Amendola, Stefano Wolde Sellasie, Sium Pedicini, Francesco Carlini, Massimo Russo, Giulia Ossola, Nicola Leoncini, Andrea Botti, Flavia Bonanno, Elena Trimboli, Pierpaolo Uccioli, Luigi Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience |
title | Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience |
title_full | Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience |
title_short | Evaluation of the Performance of ACR TI-RADS Also Considering Those Nodules with No Indication of FNAC: A Single-Center Experience |
title_sort | evaluation of the performance of acr ti-rads also considering those nodules with no indication of fnac: a single-center experience |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9865358/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36675326 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12020398 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT amendolastefano evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT woldesellasiesium evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT pedicinifrancesco evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT carlinimassimo evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT russogiulia evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT ossolanicola evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT leonciniandrea evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT bottiflavia evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT bonannoelena evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT trimbolipierpaolo evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience AT uccioliluigi evaluationoftheperformanceofacrtiradsalsoconsideringthosenoduleswithnoindicationoffnacasinglecenterexperience |