Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2015
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF REAL-TIME AND STATIC ULTRASONOGRAPHY DIAGNOSES FOR THE INCIDENTAL DETECTION OF DIFFUSE THYROID DISEASE.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Dong Wook
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of real-time and static ultrasonography (US) for the incidental detection of diffuse thyroid disease (DTD).
METHODS: In 118 consecutive patients, a single radiologist performed real-time US before thyroidectomy. For static US, the same radiologist retrospectively investigated the sonographic findings on a picture-archiving and communication system after 3 months. The diagnostic categories of both real-time and static US diagnoses were determined based on the number of abnormal findings, and the diagnostic indices were calculated by a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis using the histopathologic results as the reference standard.
RESULTS: Histopathologic results included normal thyroid (n = 77), Hashimoto thyroiditis (n = 11), non-Hashimoto lymphocytic thyroiditis (n = 29), and diffuse hyperplasia (n = 1). Normal thyroid and DTD showed significant differences in echogenicity, echotexture, glandular margin, and vascularity on both real-time and static US. There was a positive correlation between US categories and histopathologic results in both real-time and static US. The highest diagnostic indices were obtained when the cutoff criteria of real-time and static US diagnoses were chosen as indeterminate and suspicious for DTD, respectively. The ROC curve analysis showed that real-time US was superior to static US in diagnostic accuracy.
CONCLUSION: Both real-time and static US may be helpful for the detection of incidental DTD, but real-time US is superior to static US for detecting incidental DTD.
METHODS: In 118 consecutive patients, a single radiologist performed real-time US before thyroidectomy. For static US, the same radiologist retrospectively investigated the sonographic findings on a picture-archiving and communication system after 3 months. The diagnostic categories of both real-time and static US diagnoses were determined based on the number of abnormal findings, and the diagnostic indices were calculated by a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis using the histopathologic results as the reference standard.
RESULTS: Histopathologic results included normal thyroid (n = 77), Hashimoto thyroiditis (n = 11), non-Hashimoto lymphocytic thyroiditis (n = 29), and diffuse hyperplasia (n = 1). Normal thyroid and DTD showed significant differences in echogenicity, echotexture, glandular margin, and vascularity on both real-time and static US. There was a positive correlation between US categories and histopathologic results in both real-time and static US. The highest diagnostic indices were obtained when the cutoff criteria of real-time and static US diagnoses were chosen as indeterminate and suspicious for DTD, respectively. The ROC curve analysis showed that real-time US was superior to static US in diagnostic accuracy.
CONCLUSION: Both real-time and static US may be helpful for the detection of incidental DTD, but real-time US is superior to static US for detecting incidental DTD.