Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36817602›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2023

The use of modified TI-RADS using contrast-enhanced ultrasound features for classification purposes in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant thyroid nodules: A prospective and multi-center study.

Ping Zhou, Feng Chen, Peng Zhou, Lifeng Xu, Lei Wang, Zhiyuan Wang, Yi Yu, Xueling Liu, Bin Wang, Wei Yan and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Optimizing Care for Primary Glomerulonephritis: The Role of Thyroid Evaluation.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2025
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

13 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Ping ZhouDepartment of Ultrasound, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Feng ChenDepartment of Ultrasound, Yiyang Central Hospital of Hunan University of Chinese Medicine, Yiyang, Hunan, China.
Peng ZhouDepartment of Ultrasound, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Lifeng XuDepartment of Ultrasound, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Lei WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Huang Shi Central Hospital, Huang Shi, Hubei, China.
Zhiyuan WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Hunan Cancer Hospital, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Yi YuDepartment of Ultrasound, The People's Hospital of Liuyang, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Xueling LiuDepartment of Ultrasound, The First Affiliated of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Bin WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Yueyang Central Hospital, Yueyang, Hunan, China.
Wei YanDepartment of Ultrasound, Hubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Heng ZhouDepartment of Ultrasound, Hubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Yichao TaoDepartment of Ultrasound, Xiaogan Central Hospital, Xiaogan, Hubei, China.
Wengang LiuDepartment of Ultrasound, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Central South University · CNHubei Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNGuangxi University of Chinese Medicine · CNHuangshi Central Hospital · CNHunan Cancer Hospital · CNHunan City University · CNLiuyang City Maternal and Child Health Hospital · CNShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNShenzhen Second People's Hospital · CNThe Central Hospital of Xiao gan · CNThird Xiangya Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of a modified thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS) in combination with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for differentiating between benign and malignant thyroid nodules and to assess inter-observer concordance between different observers. Methods: This study included 3353 patients who underwent thyroid ultrasound (US) and CEUS in ten multi-centers between September 2018 and March 2020. Based on a modified TI-RADS classification using the CEUS enhancement pattern of thyroid lesions, ten radiologists analyzed all US and CEUS examinations independently and assigned a TI-RADS category to each thyroid nodule. Pathology was the reference standard for determining the diagnostic performance (accuracy (ACC), sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPN), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV)) of the modified TI-RADS for predicting malignant thyroid nodules. The risk of malignancy was stratified for each TI-RADS category-based on the total number of benign and malignant lesions in that category. ROC curve was used to determine the cut-off value and the area under the curve (AUC). Cohen's Kappa statistic was applied to assess the inter-observer agreement of each sonological feature and TI-RADS category for thyroid nodules. Results: The calculated malignancy risk in the modified TI-RADS categories 5, 4b, 4a, 3 and 2 nodules was 95.4%, 86.0%, 12.0%, 4.1% and 0%, respectively. The malignancy risk for the five categories was in agreement with the suggested malignancy risk. The ROC curve showed that the AUC under the ROC curve was 0.936, and the cutoff value of the modified TI-RADS classification was >TI-RADS 4a, whose SEN, ACC, PPV, NPV and SPN were 93.6%, 91.9%, 90.4%, 93.7% and 88.5% respectively. The Kappa value for taller than wide, microcalcification, marked hypoechoic, solid composition, irregular margins and enhancement pattern of CEUS was 0.94, 0.93, 0.75, 0.89, 0.86 and 0.81, respectively. There was also good agreement between the observers with regards to the modified TI-RADS classification, the Kappa value was 0.80. Conclusions: The actual risk of malignancy according to the modified TI-RADS concurred with the suggested risk of malignancy. Inter-observer agreement for the modified TI-RADS category was good, thus suggesting that this classification was very suitable for clinical application.

Indexed as

Thyroid NoduleDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansProspective StudiesUltrasonographycontrast-enhanced ultrasoundmulti-centerprospectivethyroidthyroid imaging report and data system

Identifiers

PMID36817602
PMCPMC9929352
OpenAlexW4318832647

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.