Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System for US Features of Nodules: A Step in Establishing Better Stratification of Cancer Risk

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11110206

Risk stratification of thyroid malignancy by using the number of suspicious US features allows for a practical and convenient thyroid imaging reporting and data system.

Purpose

To develop a practical thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TIRADS) with which to categorize thyroid nodules and stratify their malignant risk.

Materials and Methods

The institutional review board approved this retrospective study, and the requirement to obtain informed consent for the review of images and records was waived. From May to December 2008, ultrasonographically (US)-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) was performed in 3674 focal thyroid nodules in 3414 consecutive patients. The study included the 1658 thyroid nodules (≥1 cm in maximum diameter at US) in 1638 patients (1373 women, 265 men) for which pathologic diagnosis or follow-up findings were available. Univariate and multivariate analyses with generalized estimating equations were performed to investigate the relationship between suspicious US features and thyroid cancer. A score for each significant factor was assigned and multiplied by the β coefficient obtained for each significant factor from multivariate logistic regression analysis. Scores for each significant factor were then added, resulting in an equation that fitted the probability of malignancy in thyroid nodules. The authors evaluated the fitted probability by using a regression equation; the risk of malignancy was determined according to the number of suspicious US features.

Results

The following US features showed a significant association with malignancy: solid component, hypoechogenicity, marked hypoechogenicity, microlobulated or irregular margins, microcalcifications, and taller-than-wide shape. As the number of suspicious US features increased, the fitted probability and risk of malignancy also increased. Positive predictive values according to the number of suspicious US features were significantly different (P < .001).

Conclusion

Risk stratification of thyroid malignancy by using the number of suspicious US features allows for a practical and convenient TIRADS.

© RSNA, 2011

References

  • 1 Fagin JA, Mitsiades N. Molecular pathology of thyroid cancer: diagnostic and clinical implications. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;22(6):955–969. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Papini E, Guglielmi R, Bianchini A, et al.. Risk of malignancy in nonpalpable thyroid nodules: predictive value of ultrasound and color-Doppler features. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002;87(5):1941–1946. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Koike E, Noguchi S, Yamashita H, et al.. Ultrasonographic characteristics of thyroid nodules: prediction of malignancy. Arch Surg 2001;136(3):334–337. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kim EK, Park CS, Chung WY, et al.. New sonographic criteria for recommending fine-needle aspiration biopsy of nonpalpable solid nodules of the thyroid. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178(3):687–691. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Moon WJ, Jung SL, Lee JH, et al.. Benign and malignant thyroid nodules: US differentiation—multicenter retrospective study. Radiology 2008;247(3):762–770. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gharib H, Papini E, Valcavi R, et al.. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and Associazione Medici Endocrinologi medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules. Endocr Pract 2006;12(1):63–102. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 American Thyroid Association (ATA) Guidelines Taskforce on Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer , Cooper DS, Doherty GM, et al.. Revised American Thyroid Association management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid 2009;19(11):1167–1214. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Frates MC, Benson CB, Charboneau JW, et al.. Management of thyroid nodules detected at US: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound consensus conference statement. Radiology 2005;237(3):794–800. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Peccin S, de Castsro JA, Furlanetto TW, Furtado AP, Brasil BA, Czepielewski MA. Ultrasonography: is it useful in the diagnosis of cancer in thyroid nodules? J Endocrinol Invest 2002;25(1):39–43. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Chan BK, Desser TS, McDougall IR, Weigel RJ, Jeffrey RB. Common and uncommon sonographic features of papillary thyroid carcinoma. J Ultrasound Med 2003;22(10):1083–1090. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Cappelli C, Castellano M, Pirola I, et al.. The predictive value of ultrasound findings in the management of thyroid nodules. QJM 2007;100(1):29–35. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Park JY, Lee HJ, Jang HW, et al.. A proposal for a thyroid imaging reporting and data system for ultrasound features of thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid 2009;19(11):1257–1264. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Horvath E, Majlis S, Rossi R, et al.. An ultrasonogram reporting system for thyroid nodules stratifying cancer risk for clinical management. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009;94(5):1748–1751. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 American College of Radiology . Breast imaging reporting and data system, breast imaging atlas. 4th ed. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2003. Google Scholar
  • 15 Anderson L, Middleton WD, Teefey SA, et al.. Hashimoto thyroiditis. I. Sonographic analysis of the nodular form of Hashimoto thyroiditis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195(1):208–215. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kwak JY, Kim EK, Kim HJ, Kim MJ, Son EJ, Moon HJ. How to combine ultrasound and cytological information in decision making about thyroid nodules. Eur Radiol 2009;19(8):1923–1931. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Cibas ES, Ali SZ. The Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Thyroid 2009;19(11):1159–1165. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Yoon JH, Kwak JY, Kim EK, et al.. How to approach thyroid nodules with indeterminate cytology. Ann Surg Oncol 2010;17(8):2147–2155. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kwak JY, Kim EK, Kim MJ, et al.. The role of ultrasound in thyroid nodules with a cytology reading of “suspicious for papillary thyroid carcinoma.”. Thyroid 2008;18(5):517–522. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Davies L, Welch HG. Increasing incidence of thyroid cancer in the United States, 1973–2002. JAMA 2006;295(18):2164–2167. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kent WD, Hall SF, Isotalo PA, Houlden RL, George RL, Groome PA. Increased incidence of differentiated thyroid carcinoma and detection of subclinical disease. CMAJ 2007;177(11):1357–1361. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Abdullah N, Mesurolle B, El-Khoury M, Kao E. Breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon for US: interobserver agreement for assessment of breast masses. Radiology 2009;252(3):665–672. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kim EK, Ko KH, Oh KK, et al.. Clinical application of the BI-RADS final assessment to breast sonography in conjunction with mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190(5):1209–1215. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gharib H, Papini E, Paschke R, et al.. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Associazione Medici Endocrinologi, and European Thyroid Association Medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules: executive summary of recommendations. Endocr Pract 2010;16(3):468–475. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Frates MC, Benson CB, Doubilet PM, et al.. Prevalence and distribution of carcinoma in patients with solitary and multiple thyroid nodules on sonography. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91(9):3411–3417. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Choi SH, Kim EK, Kwak JY, Kim MJ, Son EJ. Interobserver and intraobserver variations in ultrasound assessment of thyroid nodules. Thyroid 2010;20(2):167–172. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kwak JY, Koo H, Youk JH, et al.. Value of US correlation of a thyroid nodule with initially benign cytologic results. Radiology 2010;254(1):292–300. LinkGoogle Scholar

Article History

Received January 31, 2011; revision requested March 18; revision received April 18; accepted May 2; final version accepted May 17.
Published online: Sept 2011
Published in print: Sept 2011