Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30222755›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Comparison of strain elastography, point shear wave elastography using acoustic radiation force impulse imaging and 2D-shear wave elastography for the differentiation of thyroid nodules.

Georgia Kyriakidou, Mireen Friedrich-Rust, Dimitra Bon, Ishani Sircar, Christopher Schrecker, Dimitra Bogdanou, Eva Herrmann, Joerg Bojunga

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Georgia KyriakidouDepartment of Internal Medicine 1, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8174-2927
Mireen Friedrich-RustDepartment of Internal Medicine 1, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
Dimitra BonInstitute of Biostatistics and Mathematical Modeling, Faculty of Medicine, J.W. Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany.
Ishani SircarDepartment of Internal Medicine 1, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
Christopher SchreckerDepartment of Internal Medicine 1, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
Dimitra BogdanouDepartment of Internal Medicine 1, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.
Eva HerrmannInstitute of Biostatistics and Mathematical Modeling, Faculty of Medicine, J.W. Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany.
Joerg BojungaDepartment of Internal Medicine 1, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of the study was to compare three different elastography methods, namely Strain Elastography (SE), Point Shear-Wave Elastography (pSWE) using Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI)-Imaging and 2D-Shear Wave Elastography (2D-SWE), in the same study population for the differentiation of thyroid nodules. MATERIALS AND

methodsAll patients received a conventional ultrasound scan, SE and 2D-SWE, and all patients except for two received ARFI-Imaging. Cytology/histology of thyroid nodules was used as a reference method. SE measures the relative stiffness within the region of interest (ROI) using the surrounding tissue as reference tissue. ARFI mechanically excites the tissue at the ROI using acoustic pulses to generate localized tissue displacements. 2D-SWE measures tissue elasticity using the velocity of many shear waves as they propagate through the tissue.

results84 nodules (73 benign and 11 malignant) in 62 patients were analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity and NPV of SE were 73%, 70% and 94%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity and NPV of ARFI and 2D-SWE were 90%, 79%, 98% and 73%, 67%, 94% respectively, using a cut-off value of 1.98m/s for ARFI and 2.65m/s (21.07kPa) for 2D-SWE. The AUROC (Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic) of SE, ARFI and 2D-SWE for the diagnosis of malignant thyroid nodules were 52%, 86% and 71%, respectively. A significant difference in AUROC was found between SE and ARFI (p = 0.008), while no significant difference was found between ARFI and SWE (86% vs. 71%, p = 0.31), or SWE and SE (71% vs. 52%, p = 0.26).

conclusionpSWE using ARFI and 2D-SWE showed comparable results for the differentiation of thyroid nodules. ARFI was superior to elastography using SE.

Indexed as

AcousticsCell DifferentiationElasticity Imaging TechniquesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityThyroid NoduleUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID30222755
PMCPMC6141102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.