» Articles » PMID: 31031222

Interrater Reliability of Various Thyroid Imaging Reporting And Data System (TIRADS) Classifications for Differentiating Benign from Malignant Thyroid Nodules

Overview
Specialty Oncology
Date 2019 Apr 30
PMID 31031222
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Thyroid ultrasound(US) is used as the first diagnostic tool to assess the management of disease but is operator dependent. There have been few reports evaluating interrater variability in US assessment. Therefore, we evaluated interrater reliability in US assessment of thyroid nodules and estimated its diagnostic accuracy for various TIRADS systems. Methods: This retrospective study included 24 malignant nodules and 84 benign nodules from January 2015 to October 2017. Two blinded observers independently reviewed stored US images by using TIRADS. All analyses followed guidelines proposed by ACR-TR, Siriraj-TR and EU-TR systems. Interrater reliability was calculated using Cohen’s Kappa statistics. Diagnostic accuracy were also calculated. Results: Interobserver agreement showed substantial agreement for composition (K=0.616); echogenicity and echogenic foci showed fair agreement (K=0.327 and 0.288, respectively); margin showed slight agreement (K=0.143). Interrater reliability for the final assessment; moderate agreement for ACR-TIRADS system (K=0.500); fair agreement for EU-TIRADS system (K=0.209) and slight agreement (K=0.114) for Siriraj-TIRADS system. The diagnostic performance from the two observers; ACRTIRADS system; sensitivities were 75% and 79.2%, specificities were 58.3% and 56%, positive predictive value (PPV) were 34% and 33.9% and negative predictive value (NPV) were 89.1% and 90.4%. For the Siriraj-TIRADS system, sensitivities were 41.7% and 25%, specificities were 84.5% and 89.3%, positive predictive value (PPV) were 43.5% and 40% and negative predictive value (NPV) were 83.5% and 80.6%. For the EU-TIRADS system, sensitivities were 45.8% and 66.7%, specificities were 79.8% and 72.6%, positive predictive value (PPV) were 39.3% and 41% and negative predictive value (NPV) were 83.8% and 88.4%. Conclusion: The ACR-TIRADS had highest interobserver agreement, a trend to have highest sensitivity and negative predictive value for diagnosis of malignant thyroid nodules. Siriraj-TIRADS had higher specificity and accuracy, but lower interobserver agreement.

Citing Articles

Real-Time Ultrasonography and the Evaluation of Static Images Yield Different Results in the Assessment of EU-TIRADS Categories.

Slowinska-Klencka D, Popowicz B, Klencki M J Clin Med. 2023; 12(18).

PMID: 37762750 PMC: 10532169. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12185809.


Diagnostic efficiency among Eu-/C-/ACR-TIRADS and S-Detect for thyroid nodules: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Yang L, Li C, Chen Z, He S, Wang Z, Liu J Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023; 14:1227339.

PMID: 37720531 PMC: 10501732. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1227339.


Diagnostic Performance of Various Ultrasound Risk Stratification Systems for Benign and Malignant Thyroid Nodules: A Meta-Analysis.

Kim J, Kim B, Stybayeva G, Hwang S Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(2).

PMID: 36672373 PMC: 9857194. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15020424.


Diagnostic Performance of ACR and Kwak TI-RADS for Benign and Malignant Thyroid Nodules: An Update Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kang Y, Stybayeya G, Lee J, Hwang S Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14(23).

PMID: 36497443 PMC: 9740871. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14235961.


Summary of Meta-analyses of Studies Considering Lesion Size Cut-off Thresholds for The Assessment of Eligibility for FNAB and Sonoelastography and Inter- and Intra-observer Agreement in Estimating the Malignant Potential of Focal Lesions of The....

Dobruch-Sobczak K, Adamczewski Z, Dedecjus M, Lewinski A, Migda B, Ruchala M J Ultrason. 2022; 22(89):130-135.

PMID: 35811592 PMC: 9231511. DOI: 10.15557/JoU.2022.0021.


References
1.
Grant E, Tessler F, Hoang J, Langer J, Beland M, Berland L . Thyroid Ultrasound Reporting Lexicon: White Paper of the ACR Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (TIRADS) Committee. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015; 12(12 Pt A):1272-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.07.011. View

2.
Delfim R, Veiga L, Vidal A, Lopes F, Vaisman M, Teixeira P . Likelihood of malignancy in thyroid nodules according to a proposed Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS) classification merging suspicious and benign ultrasound features. Arch Endocrinol Metab. 2017; 61(3):211-221. PMC: 10118798. DOI: 10.1590/2359-3997000000262. View

3.
Choi S, Kim E, Kwak J, Kim M, Son E . Interobserver and intraobserver variations in ultrasound assessment of thyroid nodules. Thyroid. 2009; 20(2):167-72. DOI: 10.1089/thy.2008.0354. View

4.
Kwak J, Han K, Yoon J, Moon H, Son E, Park S . Thyroid imaging reporting and data system for US features of nodules: a step in establishing better stratification of cancer risk. Radiology. 2011; 260(3):892-9. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11110206. View

5.
Park S, Park S, Choi Y, Kim D, Son E, Lee H . Interobserver variability and diagnostic performance in US assessment of thyroid nodule according to size. Ultraschall Med. 2012; 33(7):E186-E190. DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1325404. View