Comparison of the diagnostic performance of the 2017 ACR TI-RADS guideline to the Kwak guideline in children with thyroid nodules.
Carcinoma
Children
Nodules
Thyroid
Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System
Ultrasound
Journal
Pediatric radiology
ISSN: 1432-1998
Titre abrégé: Pediatr Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0365332
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
received:
16
12
2018
accepted:
08
03
2019
revised:
06
02
2019
entrez:
3
6
2019
pubmed:
4
6
2019
medline:
17
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Kwak Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (Kwak-TI-RADS) guideline (2011) and American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TI-RADS) guideline (2017) were developed as ultrasound (US) risk stratification tools for detecting thyroid malignancy in adults. The purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-rater reliability and diagnostic performance of the ACR TI-RADS guideline in the pediatric population and compare it to the Kwak guideline. This retrospective study comprised 75 children who underwent thyroid US at a tertiary-level pediatric hospital. Three pediatric radiologists and one pediatric radiology fellow graded the US findings using the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines. We assessed reliability of radiologists' ratings using percentage inter-rater agreement, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC The inter-rater agreement was significantly better for the ACR TI-RADS level compared to the Kwak-TI-RADS level (P<0.001) using the percentage pairwise agreement. The ROC curves for assessing the diagnostic performance of the two methods showed no significant difference between the methods. The AUROCCs for the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS levels were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.82) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.61-0.82), respectively. Both the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines provide moderate malignancy risk stratification for thyroid nodules in the pediatric population, with better inter-rater agreement for the ACR TI-RADS guideline. Further work to adjust the recommendations for pediatric patients is necessary.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Kwak Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (Kwak-TI-RADS) guideline (2011) and American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR TI-RADS) guideline (2017) were developed as ultrasound (US) risk stratification tools for detecting thyroid malignancy in adults.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to investigate the inter-rater reliability and diagnostic performance of the ACR TI-RADS guideline in the pediatric population and compare it to the Kwak guideline.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This retrospective study comprised 75 children who underwent thyroid US at a tertiary-level pediatric hospital. Three pediatric radiologists and one pediatric radiology fellow graded the US findings using the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines. We assessed reliability of radiologists' ratings using percentage inter-rater agreement, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC
RESULTS
The inter-rater agreement was significantly better for the ACR TI-RADS level compared to the Kwak-TI-RADS level (P<0.001) using the percentage pairwise agreement. The ROC curves for assessing the diagnostic performance of the two methods showed no significant difference between the methods. The AUROCCs for the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS levels were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.82) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.61-0.82), respectively.
CONCLUSION
Both the Kwak-TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS guidelines provide moderate malignancy risk stratification for thyroid nodules in the pediatric population, with better inter-rater agreement for the ACR TI-RADS guideline. Further work to adjust the recommendations for pediatric patients is necessary.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31154502
doi: 10.1007/s00247-019-04385-6
pii: 10.1007/s00247-019-04385-6
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Practice Guideline
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
862-868Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-82
pubmed: 23092060
Radiology. 2018 Aug;288(2):591-599
pubmed: 29714678
Radiographics. 2017 Oct;37(6):1731-1752
pubmed: 29019758
Thyroid. 2015 Jul;25(7):716-59
pubmed: 25900731
Radiology. 2011 Sep;260(3):892-9
pubmed: 21771959
Pediatr Radiol. 2017 Apr;47(4):429-436
pubmed: 28127634
Pediatr Radiol. 2018 Jan;48(1):74-84
pubmed: 28983667
Semin Nucl Med. 2016 Mar;46(2):147-64
pubmed: 26897719
Thyroid. 2016 Jan;26(1):1-133
pubmed: 26462967
J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 May;14(5):587-595
pubmed: 28372962
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019 Jan;212(1):188-194
pubmed: 30403525
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018 Jul;211(1):162-167
pubmed: 29702015