ArticleCureus2021
Impact of Ultrasonographic Features for Thyroid Malignancy in Patients With Bethesda Categories III, IV, and V: A Retrospective Observational Study in a Tertiary Center.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sociodemographic and clinical predictors of malignancy in thyroid nodules: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- SERPINA1 methylation as a novel diagnostic marker for early-stage papillary thyroid carcinoma via MAPK6-AKT/mTOR pathway.Clinical epigenetics · 2025Article
- Retrospective study from a single center to comparison of diagnostic value of three thyroid imaging reporting and data systems in Bethesda III/IV thyroid nodules.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Rates and Predictors of Malignancy in Bethesda III and IV Thyroid Nodules: A Prospective Study.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Ultrasonographic predictors of thyroid cancer in Bethesda III and IV thyroid nodules.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) with cytologic interpretation using the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology has been widely used for thyroid nodules, its efficiency in Bethesda categories of III, IV, and V has been questioned due to variable risk of malignancy. We aimed to evaluate the impact of radiological parameters in Bethesda category III, IV, and V for thyroid malignancy.
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of patients with Bethesda category III, IV, and V, and subsequent thyroidectomy. Demographic, ultrasonographic, and clinical variables were recorded. Independent variables for thyroid malignancy and the predictive power of imaging findings were analyzed.
resultsThere were 159 patients with a mean age of 48.1±13.4 years. Hypoechogenicity of the index nodule was the most common finding in 87 patients (54.7%). There were 74 (46.5%), 34 (21.4%), and 51 patients (32.1%) with Bethesda III, IV, and V categories, respectively. There were 91 patients (57.2%) with a diagnosis of thyroid malignancy. Overall malignant pathology was detected in 18 (24.3%), 25 (73.5%), and 48 patients (94.1%) in Bethesda III, IV, and V categories, respectively (p=0.001). The presence of solitary nodule, hypoechogenicity, and solid structure of index nodule and Bethesda category IV and V were significant variables for final malignant pathology (p<0.05 for all).
conclusionHypoechogenicity and solid structure in a solitary index nodule should be regarded as significant ultrasonographic findings for thyroid malignancy. Bethesda category IV and V were also significantly associated with malignancy.
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.