ArticleEndocrine2025
The value of non-punctate echogenic foci in the ultrasonic diagnosis of thyroid nodules.
Article in Endocrine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic value of different subtypes of non-punctate echogenic foci in thyroid malignancy.
methodsRetrospective research of 342 thyroid nodules with calcification was performed. The echogenic foci were divided into punctate echogenic foci (type I) and non-punctate echogenic foci (type II), and type II were further divided into four subtypes: macrocalcification (type IIa), continuous peripheral calcification (type IIb), discontinuous peripheral calcification (type IIc) and isolated calcification (type IId). Postoperative histopathological results were used as the gold standard to evaluate the correlation between non-punctate echogenic foci subtypes and thyroid malignancy.
resultsThe malignant risk of nodules with echogenic foci was type I (82.1%) > type IIa (66.2%) > type IIc (52.9%) > type IId (16.7%) > type IIb (13.9%), P < 0.001. Type I and type IIa echogenic foci were independent risk factors for thyroid cancer (OR = 16.593, 7.785). Solid, hypoechogenicity/marked hypoechogenicity and a single lesion in a unilateral thyroid lobe were independently associated with malignant thyroid nodules with macrocalcification(OR = 6.825, 40.042, 5.201). Irregular margins and uneven calcification thickness were independent factors for malignant thyroid nodules with peripheral calcification (OR = 5.676, 2.750).
conclusionType IIa echogenic foci could independently predict thyroid malignancy. The diagnostic value of non-punctate echogenic foci depended on the differentiated combination of ultrasound characteristics. Type IIa nodules with solid composition, irregular margins, and a single lesion in a unilateral thyroid lobe implied a higher risk of malignancy; peripheral calcified nodules with irregular margins and uneven calcification thickness suggested an increased risk of malignancy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39798066What 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.