PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Ultrasound-based risk stratification systems (Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (TIRADSs)) of thyroid nodules (TNs) have been implemented in clinical practice worldwide based on their high performance. However, it remains unexplored whether different TIRADSs perform uniformly across a range of TNs in routine practice. This issue is highly relevant today, given the ongoing international effort to establish a unified TIRADS (i.e. I-TIRADS), supported by the leading societies specializing in TNs. The study aimed to conduct a direct comparison among ACR-, EU-, and K-TIRADS in the distribution of TNs: (1) across the TIRADS categories, and (2) based on their estimated cancer risk.
UNASSIGNED: A search was conducted on PubMed and Embase until June 2023. Original studies that sequentially assessed TNs using TIRADSs, regardless of FNAC indication, were selected. General study characteristics and data on the distribution of TNs across TIRADSs were extracted.
UNASSIGNED: Seven studies, reporting a total of 41,332 TNs, were included in the analysis. The prevalence of ACR-TIRADS 1-2 was significantly higher than that of EU-TIRADS 2 and K-TIRADS 2, with no significant difference observed among intermediate- and high-risk categories of TIRADSs. According to malignancy risk estimation, K-TIRADS often classified TNs as having more severe risk, ACR-TIRADS as having moderate risk, and EU-TIRADS classified TNs as having lower risk.
UNASSIGNED: ACR-, EU-, and K-TIRADS assess TNs similarly across their categories, with slight differences in low-risk classifications. Despite this, focusing on cancer risk estimation, the three TIRADSs assess TNs differently. These findings should be considered as a prerequisite for developing the I-TIRADS.
UNASSIGNED: A search was conducted on PubMed and Embase until June 2023. Original studies that sequentially assessed TNs using TIRADSs, regardless of FNAC indication, were selected. General study characteristics and data on the distribution of TNs across TIRADSs were extracted.
UNASSIGNED: Seven studies, reporting a total of 41,332 TNs, were included in the analysis. The prevalence of ACR-TIRADS 1-2 was significantly higher than that of EU-TIRADS 2 and K-TIRADS 2, with no significant difference observed among intermediate- and high-risk categories of TIRADSs. According to malignancy risk estimation, K-TIRADS often classified TNs as having more severe risk, ACR-TIRADS as having moderate risk, and EU-TIRADS classified TNs as having lower risk.
UNASSIGNED: ACR-, EU-, and K-TIRADS assess TNs similarly across their categories, with slight differences in low-risk classifications. Despite this, focusing on cancer risk estimation, the three TIRADSs assess TNs differently. These findings should be considered as a prerequisite for developing the I-TIRADS.
摘要：
基于超声的甲状腺结节（TNs）危险分层系统（TIRADSs）已在全球范围内的临床实践中实施。基于他们的高性能。然而,在常规实践中,不同的TIRADS在一系列TNs中的表现是否一致仍有待探索.这个问题在今天非常重要，鉴于国际社会正在努力建立统一的TIRADS（即I-TIRADS），由专门从事跨国公司的领先协会支持。这项研究的目的是进行ACR-之间的直接比较，欧盟-,和K-TIRADS在TNs分布中：1)在TIRADS类别中，和2)基于他们估计的癌症风险。方法在Pubmed和Embase上进行搜索，直到2023年6月。使用TIRADS依次评估TNs的原始研究，无论FNAC指示如何，被选中。提取了TIRADS中TNs的一般研究特征和分布数据。结果七项研究，报告了总共41,332个TNs，包括在分析中。ACR-TIRADS1-2的患病率显着高于EU-TIRADS2和K-TIRADS2，在TIRADS的中危和高危类别之间没有显着差异。根据恶性肿瘤风险估计，K-TIRADS通常将TNs归类为具有更严重的风险，ACR-TIRADS为中等风险，而EU-TIRADS将TNs归类为较低风险。结论ACR-，欧盟-,K-TIRADS在其类别中类似地评估TNs，低风险分类略有不同。尽管如此,专注于癌症风险估计，这三个TIRADS对TNs的评估不同。这些数字应被视为开发I-TIRADS的先决条件。
