Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,441

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.

Risk of Malignancy in Nonpalpable Thyroid Nodules: Predictive Value of Ultrasound and Color-Doppler Features

Enrico Papini, Rinaldo Guglielmi, Antonio Bianchini, Anna Crescenzi, Silvia Taccogna, Francesco Nardi, Claudio Panunzi, Roberta Rinaldi, Vincenzo Toscano, Claudio Maurizio Pacella·2002·The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism

Abstract

The aim of the study was to correlate the sonographic [ultrasound (US)] and color-Doppler (CFD) findings with the results of US-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNA) and of pathologic staging of resected carcinomas to establish: 1) the relative importance of US features as risk factors of malignancy; and 2) a cost-effective management of nonpalpable thyroid nodules. Four hundred ninety-four consecutive patients with nonpalpable thyroid nodules (8-15 mm) were evaluated by US, CFD, and US-FNA. Ninety-two patients with inadequate cytology were excluded from the study. All patients with suspicious or malignant cytology underwent surgery, whereas subjects with benign cytology had clinical and US control 6 months later. Thyroid malignancies were observed in 18 of 195 (9.2%) solitary thyroid nodules and in 13 of 207 (6.3%) multinodular goiters. Cancer prevalence was similar in nodules greater or smaller than 10 mm (9.1 vs. 7.0%). Extracapsular growth (pT(4)) was present in 35.5%, and nodal involvement in 19.4% of neoplastic lesions, with no significant differences between tumors greater or smaller than 10 mm. At US cancers presented a solid hypoechoic appearance in 87% of cases, irregular or blurred margins in 77.4%, an intranodular vascular pattern in 74.2%, and microcalcifications in 29.0%. Irregular margins (RR 16.83), intranodular vascular spots (RR 14.29), and microcalcifications (RR 4.97) were independent risk factors of malignancy. FNA performed on hypoechoic nodules with at least one risk factor was able to identify 87% of the cancers at the expence of cytological evaluation of 38.4% of nonpalpable lesions. The majority of nonpalpable thyroid tumors can be identified by cytological evaluation of lesions presenting hypoechoic appearance in conjunction with one independent risk factor. Due to the nonnegligible prevalence of extracapsular growth and nodal metastasis, US-FNA should be performed on all 8-15 mm hypoechoic nodules with irregular margins, intranodular vascular spots or microcalcifications. Nonpalpable lesions of the thyroid without risk factors should be followed by means of clinical and US evaluation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1210/jc.87.5.1941

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Papini, E., Guglielmi, R., Bianchini, A., Crescenzi, A., Taccogna, S., Nardi, F., Panunzi, C., Rinaldi, R., Toscano, V., & Pacella, C. M.
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Published
2002-05-01
Volume
87
Issue
5
Pages
1941-1946
ISSN
0021-972X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2114535689
Cited by
1,441
References
0
FWCI
14.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.