Evaluation of the efficacy of EU-TIRADS and ACR-TIRADS in risk stratification of pediatric patients with thyroid nodules.
ACR-TIRADS
EU-TIRADS
diagnostic performance
pediatric age
thyroid nodule
thyroid nodules outcome
Journal
Frontiers in endocrinology
ISSN: 1664-2392
Titre abrégé: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101555782
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
10
09
2022
accepted:
07
11
2022
entrez:
9
12
2022
pubmed:
10
12
2022
medline:
15
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pediatric thyroid nodules have a lower prevalence but a higher rate of malignancy (ROM) than those in adults. Ultrasound features suspected of malignancy lead to fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) and subsequent cytological determination, upon which management is decided. Based on the characteristics of ultrasound, to standardize clinician decisions and avoid unnecessary FNAB, the European Thyroid Association and the American Radiology College have established guidelines for Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (EU-TIRADS and ACR-TIRADS) for ROM stratification of thyroid nodules. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ACR-TIRADS and EU-TIRADS in pediatric age. Subjects younger than 18 years of age with thyroid nodules greater than 0.5 cm observed in the 2000-2020 period were included. Data from 200 subjects were collected. The overall ROM was 13%, rising to 26% if nodules with a diameter >1 cm were considered. Patients with a malignant nodule were more likely to have a higher EU-TIRADS score (p=0.03). Missed cancer diagnoses were 26.9%. Using the EU-TIRADS system, 40% of FNABs could have been avoided, while this scoring system would have resulted in FNAB being performed in 12% of cases where the assessment of ultrasound features would not recommend FNAB. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 73.1%, 57.1%, 73.1%, and 50%, respectively. Even considering the ACR-TIRADS, a higher score correlated with a higher ROM (p<0.001). This system missed 6 diagnoses of cancer (23.1%). Using the ACR-TIRADS system, 45.3% of FNABs could have been avoided, while FNAB should have been performed in 12% of cases where it was not recommended by ultrasound characteristics. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 76.9%, 50%, 76.9%, and 42.9%, respectively. The present study confirms the correspondence of the EU-TIRADS and ACR-TIRADS categories with respect to malignancy but indicates not entirely satisfactory performance compared to FNAB alone. However, the use of the two TIRADS systems should be encouraged in multicentre studies to increase their performance and establish paediatric-specific points in the scoring criteria.
Sections du résumé
Background
Pediatric thyroid nodules have a lower prevalence but a higher rate of malignancy (ROM) than those in adults. Ultrasound features suspected of malignancy lead to fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) and subsequent cytological determination, upon which management is decided. Based on the characteristics of ultrasound, to standardize clinician decisions and avoid unnecessary FNAB, the European Thyroid Association and the American Radiology College have established guidelines for Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (EU-TIRADS and ACR-TIRADS) for ROM stratification of thyroid nodules. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ACR-TIRADS and EU-TIRADS in pediatric age.
Materials and methods
Subjects younger than 18 years of age with thyroid nodules greater than 0.5 cm observed in the 2000-2020 period were included.
Results
Data from 200 subjects were collected. The overall ROM was 13%, rising to 26% if nodules with a diameter >1 cm were considered. Patients with a malignant nodule were more likely to have a higher EU-TIRADS score (p=0.03). Missed cancer diagnoses were 26.9%. Using the EU-TIRADS system, 40% of FNABs could have been avoided, while this scoring system would have resulted in FNAB being performed in 12% of cases where the assessment of ultrasound features would not recommend FNAB. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 73.1%, 57.1%, 73.1%, and 50%, respectively. Even considering the ACR-TIRADS, a higher score correlated with a higher ROM (p<0.001). This system missed 6 diagnoses of cancer (23.1%). Using the ACR-TIRADS system, 45.3% of FNABs could have been avoided, while FNAB should have been performed in 12% of cases where it was not recommended by ultrasound characteristics. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 76.9%, 50%, 76.9%, and 42.9%, respectively.
Conclusion
The present study confirms the correspondence of the EU-TIRADS and ACR-TIRADS categories with respect to malignancy but indicates not entirely satisfactory performance compared to FNAB alone. However, the use of the two TIRADS systems should be encouraged in multicentre studies to increase their performance and establish paediatric-specific points in the scoring criteria.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36482990
doi: 10.3389/fendo.2022.1041464
pmc: PMC9723319
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1041464Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Tuli, Munarin, Scollo, Quaglino and De Sanctis.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Eur Radiol. 2021 May;31(5):2877-2885
pubmed: 33057762
Eur Radiol. 2021 Oct;31(10):7450-7463
pubmed: 33864505
J Med Ultrasound. 2019 Jul 01;27(3):141-145
pubmed: 31867177
J Endocrinol Invest. 2014 Jun;37(6):593-9
pubmed: 24789536
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Jan 30;14(3):
pubmed: 35158985
J Am Coll Radiol. 2021 Dec;18(12):1605-1613
pubmed: 34419476
Korean J Radiol. 2016 May-Jun;17(3):370-95
pubmed: 27134526
J Clin Res Pediatr Endocrinol. 2013;5 Suppl 1:57-69
pubmed: 23165002
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019 Jan 1;104(1):95-102
pubmed: 30299457
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Sep 18;13(18):
pubmed: 34572919
J Pediatr Surg. 2021 Jun;56(6):1120-1125
pubmed: 33745740
Endocr Connect. 2019 Jun;8(6):796-805
pubmed: 31085772
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2008 Jun;162(6):526-31
pubmed: 18524742
Eur Thyroid J. 2021 Feb;9(6):304-312
pubmed: 33718254
J Pediatr. 2015 Oct;167(4):886-892.e1
pubmed: 26164379
J Ultrason. 2022 Apr 27;22(89):121-129
pubmed: 35811588
Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014 Mar;28(2):245-77
pubmed: 24629865
Ultrasound Q. 2020 Mar;36(1):15-19
pubmed: 31725067
Thyroid. 2018 Jan;28(1):60-67
pubmed: 29108474
Thyroid. 2015 Jul;25(7):716-59
pubmed: 25900731
Radiographics. 2019 Nov-Dec;39(7):2040-2052
pubmed: 31603734
Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Dec 1;15(23):7119-23
pubmed: 19934298
Semin Nucl Med. 2007 Sep;37(5):340-56
pubmed: 17707241
Horm Res Paediatr. 2011;75(4):269-75
pubmed: 21252476
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021 Jan;216(1):38-47
pubmed: 32603229
Eur Thyroid J. 2021 Jul;10(5):416-424
pubmed: 34540712
Surgery. 2011 Dec;150(6):1228-33
pubmed: 22136845
Endocr Relat Cancer. 2006 Jun;13(2):427-53
pubmed: 16728572
Histopathology. 2017 Nov;71(5):760-768
pubmed: 28621837
Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2019 Oct;26(5):266-274
pubmed: 31361657
Endocr Connect. 2021 Jul 17;10(7):776-781
pubmed: 34156970
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019 Jan;212(1):188-194
pubmed: 30403525
Thyroid. 2021 Aug;31(8):1203-1211
pubmed: 33504264
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020 May 1;105(5):
pubmed: 31690937
Endocrine. 2021 Nov;74(2):365-374
pubmed: 34128176
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Oct 29;13(21):
pubmed: 34771602
Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2020 Dec;49(4):589-611
pubmed: 33153669
Pol J Radiol. 2018 Dec 19;83:e579-e586
pubmed: 30800196
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2010 Aug;164(8):714-9
pubmed: 20679162
Cancer Cytopathol. 2020 Jul;128(7):470-481
pubmed: 32078249
Eur J Endocrinol. 2020 Nov;183(5):521-528
pubmed: 32841935
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Oct 22;13(21):
pubmed: 34771467
Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2011 Aug 23;7(10):596-607
pubmed: 21862994
Radiology. 2008 Jun;247(3):762-70
pubmed: 18403624
Eur J Endocrinol. 2021 May;184(5):657-665
pubmed: 33635830
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Aug 26;13(17):
pubmed: 34503125
Front Oncol. 2022 May 13;12:840516
pubmed: 35646667
Clin Exp Med. 2022 Nov;22(4):661-666
pubmed: 35022917
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Apr;214(4):900-906
pubmed: 32069084
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2022 Jul 21;:
pubmed: 35864563
Endocrinol Diabetes Nutr (Engl Ed). 2021 Dec;68(10):728-734
pubmed: 34924161
Lancet. 2005 Jun 11-17;365(9476):2014-23
pubmed: 15950715
Endocrine. 2020 May;68(2):329-335
pubmed: 31983030
Clin Imaging. 2020 Apr;60(2):222-227
pubmed: 31927498
Support Care Cancer. 2020 Nov;28(11):5117-5124
pubmed: 32043175
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Oct;86(10):4644-8
pubmed: 11600519
Thyroid. 2017 Nov;27(11):1341-1346
pubmed: 29091573
Int J Endocrinol. 2022 Feb 07;2022:4412725
pubmed: 35178086
Eur Thyroid J. 2017 Sep;6(5):225-237
pubmed: 29167761
Pediatr Radiol. 2018 Jan;48(1):74-84
pubmed: 28983667
Endocrine. 2019 Mar;63(3):430-438
pubmed: 30519908
BMC Endocr Disord. 2019 Oct 29;19(1):112
pubmed: 31664992
Eur J Endocrinol. 2018 Jul;179(1):13-20
pubmed: 29703794
Eur J Cancer. 2006 Sep;42(13):2183-90
pubmed: 16919780
Thyroid. 2015 Jun;25(6):567-610
pubmed: 25810047
Thyroid. 2015 Oct;25(10):1121-6
pubmed: 26177342
Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2021 Aug;31(3):285-300
pubmed: 34243864
Horm Res Paediatr. 2020;93(4):239-244
pubmed: 32894855
Diagn Cytopathol. 2022 Jan;50(1):18-23
pubmed: 34797612
Horm Res Paediatr. 2019;91(2):104-117
pubmed: 30541010
Cancers (Basel). 2021 May 06;13(9):
pubmed: 34066485
J Surg Res. 2009 Sep;156(1):167-72
pubmed: 19631341
Eur J Endocrinol. 2020 Sep;183(3):255-264
pubmed: 32544875
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2021 Jul;27(4):511-518
pubmed: 34313236
J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 May;14(5):587-595
pubmed: 28372962
Endocrine. 2020 Nov;70(2):256-279
pubmed: 32827126
Eur J Endocrinol. 2018 Jun;178(6):595-603
pubmed: 29626008
J Surg Res. 2020 Jan;245:523-528
pubmed: 31450040