SynthesisEndocrine2022
Operation rate and cancer prevalence among thyroid nodules with FNAC report of suspicious for malignancy (TIR4) or malignant (TIR5) according to Italian classification system: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Endocrine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the Italian system for reporting thyroid cytology (ICCRTC), nodules suspicious for (TIR4) and consistent with (TIR5) malignancy are thought being 5% and 4-8% of all biopsies and having risk of malignancy of 60-80% and >95%, respectively. However, no evidence-based data exist about these figures. The present systematic review aimed at achieving solid estimates about TIR4 and TIR5 also considering potential influencing factors.
methodsThe review was conducted according to MOOSE. Databases of Google Scholar and Cochrane were searched. No language restriction was used. The last search was performed on February 26th 2022. Quality assessment was performed. Proportion meta-analyses were performed using random-effect model. Statistical analyses were performed using OpenMeta [Analyst].
resultsThe online search retrieved 271 articles and 16 were finally included for quantitative analysis. The risk of bias was generally low. The pooled cancer prevalence in TIR4 was 92.5% (95%CI 89.4-95.6%) with unexplained moderate heterogeneity. The pooled cancer rate among TIR5 was 99.7% (95%CI 99.3-100%) without heterogeneity. The resection rate in TIR4 and TIR5 showed heterogeneity, being the latter explained when using their prevalence among biopsies: the higher the prevalence, the higher the operation rate. The pooled risk difference between TIR5 and TIR4 was significant (OR 11.153).
conclusionsThese figures can form the basis for the next updated version of ICCRTC. Any institution using ICCRTC should revise its series of TIR4/TIR5 to calculate the cancer rate, and, importantly, consider the modifiers of the risk of malignancy. A cross check among institutions is advised.
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.