JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Examining the Bethesda criteria risk stratification of thyroid nodules.

BACKGROUND: The Bethesda criteria are proposed for appropriate stratification of malignancy risk in thyroid nodules, but controversy exists regarding their accuracy and reliability in decision making. Additionally, previous studies have suggested higher rates of both malignancy and false negative fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNA) associated with increasing nodule size. This study aims to determine the accuracy of ultrasound (US)-guided FNA using the current Bethesda criteria in surgical practice. We also aimed to investigate the relationship between nodule size and malignancy.

METHODS: A retrospective analysis of US-guided FNAs by a single surgeon during a 4.5 year period. FNA results using Bethesda criteria were compared to final surgical pathology.

RESULTS: 611 patients with thyroid nodules underwent US-guided FNA. FNA results in 375 subsequently excised thyroid nodules were recorded according to the Bethesda criteria: 192 (51%) benign, 65 (17%) atypia of unknown significance/follicular lesion of undetermined significance (AUS/FLUS), 42 (11%), suspicious for follicular neoplasm (SFN), 17 (5%) suspicious for malignancy (SM), 28 (8%) malignancy, and 31 (8%) non-diagnostic. Malignancy was confirmed by surgical pathology in 15%, 34%, 50%, 88%, 100%, and 39% of the above groups respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and false-negative rate were 61%, 99%, and 15% respectively. No correlation existed between the size of nodules with indeterminate FNA results and malignancy rate (p=0.89), or size of nodules with non-diagnostic FNA and malignancy rate (p=0.50).

CONCLUSION: The current Bethesda risk stratification system underestimated malignancy rates in benign, indeterminate and non-diagnostic cytopathologic categories in our experience. There was no positive linear correlation between nodule size and malignancy rate in these cytopathologic categories.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app