2017版美国放射学会甲状腺影像学报告与数据系统应用价值探索

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.06.016

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的评估应用2017年美国放射学会(American College of Radiology,ACR)发布的甲状腺影像学报告与数据系统(thyroid imaging reporting and data system,TI-RADS) 对甲状腺进行危险分层的价值,并依据结果提出优化分类的建议。方法回顾性分析北京大学第三医院应用2017版ACR TI-RADS评估的342例影像资料完整的甲状腺结节,将评分结果与病理结果进行对比,获得不同分值区间恶性结节的比例,并分别对最大径>1 cm及最大径≤1 cm的结节使用ROC曲线评价诊断效能。结果利用该评分系统对结节进行危险分层,全部结节、最大径>1 cm的结节、最大径≤1 cm的结节ROC曲线下面积分别为0.907、0.936、0.717。随着评分值的增加,良性结节比例逐渐下降,恶性结节所占比例逐渐增长,评分值4~6分区间恶性结节比例增长明显,以评分值为3的恶性结节比例为基准,4、5、6分结节恶性结节分别增长1.6倍、3.8倍、5.3倍,6~8分区间恶性结节稳定在81%~84%,而9分及以上恶性结节比例稳定在93%~94%,依据恶性结节的比例分布特点调整分类,TI-RADS 1类、TI-RADS 2类、TI-RADS 3类仍然分别对应0分、2分、3分,TI-RADS 4类细分为TI-RADS 4a类、TI-RADS 4b类、TI-RADS 4c类,分别对应4分、5分、6~8分,而≥9分的结节划分为TI-RADS 5类。结论 2017版ACR TI-RADS对最大径>1 cm的甲状腺结节具有较高的诊断价值,而对最大径≤1 cm的结节诊断价值欠佳。根据不同评分值区间恶性结节比例的分布特点,适当调整分类将能更详细、准确地预测结节的恶性风险。

关键词: 甲状腺结节, 超声检查, 诊断, 鉴别, 病理学, 甲状腺影像学报告与数据系统

Abstract:

Objective: To summarize and evaluate the value of applying the thyroid imaging reporting and data system (TI-RADS) released by American College of Radiology (ACR) in 2017 of the thyroid classification, and to propose an optimized classification method based on the result to facilitate more accurate and precise risk stratification of thyroid nodules.Methods: In the study, 342 thyroid nodules assessed by 2017 ACR TI-RADS were retrospectively analyzed. Each nodule had a score, and all the scores of nodules were compared with the pathological results. The proportion of malignant nodules in different scoring ranges was obtained. The diagnostic efficacy of all nodules,nodules above 1 cm and less than or equal to 1 cm was evaluated by ROC curve, respectively.Results: The AUC of all nodules, nodules above 1 cm and less than or equal to 1 cm were 0.907, 0.936 and 0.717, respectively. With the increase of the scores, the proportion of benign nodules decreased gradually, and the proportion of malignant nodules increased, especially nodules of 4-6 scores increased significantly. Based on the proportion of malignant nodules with 3 scores, the proportion of malignant nodules with 4, 5 and 6 scores increased 1.6, 3.8 and 5.3 times, respectively. The proportion of malignant nodules with 6-8 scores was 81%-84%, while the proportion of malignant nodules with 9 scores or more was 93%-94%. According to the distribution characteristics of malignant nodules, the classification of TI-RADS was adjusted. TI-RADS 4 was divided into TI-RADS 4a, TI-RADS 4b and TI-RADS 4c, corresponding to 4, 5 and 6-8 scores respectively, while the nodules with 9 scores or more were divided into TI-RADS 5.Conclusion: 2017 ACR TI-RADS has high diagnostic value for thyroid nodules above 1 cm, but it is not so effective for the nodules less than or equal to 1 cm. According to the proportion distribution of malignant nodules in diffe-rent scoring ranges, appropriate adjustment of classification will be more accurate and precisely predict the malignant risk of nodules.

Key words: Thyroid nodule, Ultrasonography, Diagnosis, differential, Pathology, Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System

中图分类号:

R736.1

付鹏,陈文,崔立刚,葛辉玉,王淑敏. 2017版美国放射学会甲状腺影像学报告与数据系统应用价值探索[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(6): 1067-1070.

Peng FU,Wen CHEN,Li-gang CUI,Hui-yu GE,Shu-min WANG. Applicational value of 2017 ACR TI-RADS stratification in diagnosing thyroid nodules[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019, 51(6): 1067-1070.

图/表 4

图1

图2

图3

参考文献 12

[1]	Tessler FN, Middleton WD, Grant EG , et al. ACR thyroid imaging, reporting and data system (TI-RADS): White paper of the ACR TI-RADS Committee[J]. J Am Coll Radiol, 2017,14(5):587-595.
[2]	Grant EG, Tessler FN, Hoang JK , et al. Thyroid ultrasound reporting lexicon: white paper of the ACR Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (TIRADS) Committee[J]. J Am Coll Ra-diol, 2015,12(12):1272-1279.
[3]	Gharib H, Papini E, Garber JR , et al. AACE/AME Guidelines American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and Associazione Medici Endocrinologi medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules: 2016 update[J]. Endocr Pract, 2016,22(5):622-639.
[4]	Middleton WD, Teefey SA, Reading CC , et al. Multiinstitutional analysis of thyroid nodule risk stratification using the American College of Radiology Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2017,208(6):1331-1341.
[5]	Kumbhar SS, O’Malley RB, Robinson TJ, et al. Why thyroid surgeons are frustrated with radiologists: Lessons learned from pre-and postoperative US[J]. Radiographics, 2016,36(7):150-250.
[6]	Gunderman RB, Mcneive LR . Is structured reporting the answer?[J]. Radiology, 2014,273(1):7-9.
[7]	Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC , et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American Thyroid Association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer[J]. Thyroid, 2016,26(1):1-133.
[8]	Haddad RI, Lydiatt WM, Ball DW , et al. Anaplastic Thyroid Carcinoma, Version 2.2015[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2015,13(9):1140-1150.
[9]	Wémeau JL, Sadoul JL, d’Herbomez M, et al. Guidelines of the French Society of Endocrinology for the management of thyroid nodules[J]. Ann Endocrinol (Paris), 2011,72(4):251-281.
[10]	Shin JH, Baek JH, Chung J , et al. Ultrasonography diagnosis and imaging-based management of thyroid nodules: Revised Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology consensus statement and recommendations[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2016,17(3):370-395.
[11]	刘红, 胡正明, 罗海愉 , 等. ACR TI-RADS分类在诊断甲状腺结节中的应用价值探究[J]. 中国超声医学杂志, 2018,34(8):673-675.
[12]	钟敏莹, 石小红, 杨丽丽 , 等. TI-RADS分类系统对不同直径甲状腺结节的诊断价值[J]. 中国超声医学杂志, 2016,32(4):289-291.

相关文章 15

[1]	薛江,张建运,时瑞瑞,谢晓艳,白嘉英,李铁军. 105例口腔颅颌面部纤维性结构不良的临床病理分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 54-61.
[2]	孟广艳,张筠肖,张渝昕,刘燕鹰. IgG4相关性疾病中枢神经系统受累的临床特点分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(6): 1043-1048.
[3]	邓雪蓉,孙晓莹,张卓莉. 类风湿关节炎患者足踝部体征和超声下病变的一致性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(6): 1037-1042.
[4]	翟莉,邱楠,宋惠. 多中心网状组织细胞增生症1例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(6): 1183-1187.
[5]	邱敏,费月阳,邓绍晖,刘承,卢剑,何为,陆敏,田晓军,张树栋,马潞林. 后肾腺瘤的诊治经验及文献回顾[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 417-419.
[6]	杨广鑫,栾景源,贾子昌. 静脉造影和超声联合引导射频闭合治疗下肢静脉曲张[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 332-336.
[7]	孟圆,张丽琪,赵雅宁,柳登高,张祖燕,高岩. 67例上颌根尖周囊肿的三维影像特点分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(2): 396-401.
[8]	王昱,邓雪蓉,季兰岚,张晓慧,耿研,张卓莉. 超声检测痛风患者肌腱受累的危险因素和诊断价值[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 143-149.
[9]	高璐,谷岩. 中国人群腭中缝形态特点分期与Demirjian牙龄的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 133-138.
[10]	袁源,郎宁,袁慧书. CT能谱曲线在脊柱转移瘤和感染性病变中的鉴别诊断价值[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(1): 183-187.
[11]	贾园,栗占国. 成人巨噬细胞活化综合征诊断困境和个体化治疗[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(6): 991-994.
[12]	康琦,张继新,高莹,张俊清,郭晓蕙. 100例甲状腺嗜酸细胞腺瘤的诊治分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(6): 1098-1101.
[13]	程功,张霞,杨菲,程嘉渝,刘燕鹰. 以发热、关节炎、皮肤色素沉着为主要表现的血管免疫母细胞性T细胞淋巴瘤1例[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(6): 1150-1152.
[14]	赵冬慧,李丹阳,张帆,屈磊,张颖,王素霞,刘刚. 4例重链或轻重链肾淀粉样变性患者的临床病理特点[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(6): 1162-1165.
[15]	柳小珍,李莹莹,杨丽萍. 全外显子组测序和目标序列靶向捕获测序在遗传性视网膜变性基因诊断中的差异[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(5): 836-844.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed