Distribution patterns of microcalcifications in suspected thyroid carcinoma: a classification method helpful for diagnosis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the distribution patterns of microcalcifications in thyroid cancers with benign cases. METHODS: In total, 358 patients having microcalcifications on ultrasonography were analysed. Microcalcifications were categorised according to the distribution patterns: (I) microcalcifications inside one (a) or more (b) suspected nodules, (II) microcalcifications not only inside but also surrounding a suspected single (a) or multiple (b) nodules, and (III) focal (a) or diffuse (b) microcalcifications in the absence of any suspected nodule. Differences in distribution patterns of microcalcifications in benign and malignant thyroid lesions were compared. RESULTS: We found that the distribution patterns of microcalcifications differed between malignant (n = 325) and benign lesions (n = 117) (X 2 = 9.926, p < 0.01). Benign lesions were classified as type Ia (66.7%), type Ib (29.1%) or type IIIa (4.3%). The specificity of type II and type IIIb in diagnosing malignant cases was 100%. Among malignant lesions, 172 locations were classified as type Ia, 106 as type Ib, 12 as type IIa, 7 as IIb, 7 as type IIIa and 19 as type IIIb. Accompanying Hashimoto thyroiditis was most frequent in type III (51.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Types II and IIIb are highly specific for cancer detection. Microcalcifications outside a nodule and those detected in the absence of any nodule should therefore be reviewed carefully in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: • A method to classify distribution patterns of thyroid microcalcifications is presented. • Distribution features of microcalcifications are useful for diagnosing thyroid cancers. • Microcalcifications outside a suspicious nodule are highly specific for thyroid cancers. • Microcalcifications without suspicious nodules should also alert the physician to thyroid cancers.

Association between the sonographer's experience and diagnostic performance of IOTA simple rules.

BACKGROUND: To validate the clinical value of simple rules in distinguishing malignant adnexal masses from benign ones and to explore the effect of simple rules for experienced and less-experienced sonographers. METHODS: Patients with persistent adnexal masses were enrolled between November 2013 and December 2015. All masses were proven through histological examinations. Five sets of diagnoses were made and compared with one another. Diagnosis 1 was made, according to the simple rules, by a trainee with little clinical diagnostic experience. Diagnoses 2 and 3 were made by experienced and less-experienced sonographers, respectively, according to their clinical experiences. With diagnosis 1 as a reference, the two sonographers were asked to provide a second diagnosis, which were diagnoses 4 and 5. The efficiency of the five sets of diagnoses was compared using ROC curves. RESULTS: In total, 75 malignant (37.7%) and 124 benign lesions (62.3%) were enrolled in this study. The mean diameter of the benign masses was obviously smaller than that of the malignant ones (6.8 ± 3.4 cm vs. 9.3 ± 4.9 cm, p < 0.01). The malignant ratio in postmenopausal women was much higher (66.1%) than that in the premenopausal population (25.7%) (p < 0.0001). Totally, 156 of the 199 cases (79.4%) resulted in conclusive diagnoses. Sensitivity and specificity were 98.4% and 73.9%, respectively, among the conclusive cases. The area under the ROC curve (Az) for the simple rule diagnosis was significantly lower than that for the experienced sonographer diagnosis (0.85 vs. 0.96, p < 0.0001); compared with the less-experienced sonographer, this difference was not significant (0.85 vs. 0.86, p = 0.9776). No significant difference was found in the comparison between the diagnoses made by the experienced sonographer before and after referencing the simple rule diagnosis (Az, 0.96 vs. 0.97, p = 0.2055). Using diagnosis 1 as a reference, the diagnostic performance of the less-experienced sonographer increased (from 0.86 to 0.92, p = 0.012); however, it was still lower than that of the experienced sonographer (Az, 96% vs. 92%, p = 0.0241). CONCLUSIONS: The simple rules was an appealing method for discriminating malignant masses from benign ones, particularly for a less-experienced sonographer.

Papillary thyroid carcinoma with massive metastasis in the uterine corpus: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Distant metastases stemming from a papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) are quite rare. Here we report an exceptional case of PTC presenting with cervical lymphatic and uterine metastases. This is the first case report of a PTC with uterine involvement. CASE PRESENTATION: A 60-year-old Chinese woman came to our hospital complaining of discomfort in the throat that she had been experiencing for about half a month. PTC and cervical lymphatic metastasis were diagnosed after ultrasound examinations. A massive heterogeneous mass was found beside the uterus during the pre-operative checkup and a diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma was suspected after a thorough case discussion. However, it proved to be a metastasis from the PTC as determined by pathological and immunohistochemical examinations after the operation. The patient declined further treatments. She was followed for 22 months with no sign of recurrence detected. CONCLUSIONS: In this report, an unusual case of PTC was presented. The patient had not only regional lymphatic metastasis, but also had a massive metastasis in the uterine corpus, which was initially misdiagnosed as ovarian carcinoma. This case is of interest because of its rarity and exceptionally good prognosis. The reason for the misdiagnosis was attributed to overlooking the possibility of a distant metastasis coming from a PTC. This case raises the issue that completing an iodine-131 scan before operating on patients with PTC may be warranted.