ArticlePloS one2016
Thyroid Nodules Detected by Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography: Prevalence and Clinical Significance.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential diagnosis of thyroid nodules through a combination of multiple ultrasonography techniques: A decision-tree model.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Value of CT Features in the Diagnosis of Papillary Thyroid Tumors in Incidental Thyroid Nodules.International journal of endocrinology · 2020Article
- Hyperintense Thyroid Incidentaloma on Time of Flight Magnetic Resonance Angiography.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2018Article
- Non-invasive Amide Proton Transfer Imaging and ZOOM Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Thyroid Micronodules.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeIncidental thyroid lesions are frequently found on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (CE-MR) angiography. The purpose of this study is to determine the prevalence of thyroid incidentalomas detected by CE-MR angiography and to evaluate their clinical significance by correlation with ultrasound (US) and cytopathological results. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 3,299 consecutive CE-MR angiography examinations performed at our institution between January 2010 and March 2013. Two radiologists evaluated the CE-MR angiography imaging in consensus regarding the presence, location, and vascularity of thyroid incidentaloma. We correlated these findings with follow-up US and cytopathologic results.
resultsThe prevalence of thyroid incidentalomas detected by CE-MR angiography was 4.6% (152/3,299 patients). CE-MR angiography showed hypervascularity in 86.8% (145/167), isovascularity in 8.4% (14/167), and hypovascularity in 4.8% (8/167) of thyroid nodules compared to vascularity of thyroid parenchyma. Among the patients with thyroid incidentaloma, 34 patients (22.4%) were followed by US examination, and all 36 nodules on CE-MR angiography were detected on follow-up US. Of these nodules, 9 (25%) nodules were classified as probably benign, 26 (72.2%) as indeterminate, and 1 (2.8%) as suspicious malignant nodule. Among the 16 nodules with available cytopathologic results, 12 nodules were benign, 2 nodules were follicular neoplasm, and 2 nodules showed non-diagnostic results.
conclusionIncidental thyroid nodules were found in 4.6% of CE-MR angiography examinations. Because the high incidence of indeterminate US feature among thyroid incidentaloma, when a thyroid incidentaloma is detected on CE-MR angiography, further evaluation with US should be performed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.