Although in this category repeat FNA is expected rather than excision, we suggest evaluation of all AUS/FLUS patients in multidisciplinary meetings to decide management and recommend follow-up of all patients with this diagnosis.
Elastosonography (ES) is a newly developed method that is used for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant thyroid nodules. In different studies, ES scoring has been compared with histopathological findings, and sensitivity and specificity of the scoring were calculated. In this study, it determines the strain index (SI) as well as the ES to score thyroid nodules, and establishes the role for these parameters in the differential diagnosis of thyroid nodules using histopathological analysis as a reference standard. Real-time ES in transverse axis (TA) and longitudinal axis (LA) was performed in 391 nodules of 292 patients. ES scoring was made for all the nodules. SI in TA and LA was calculated for four times in each nodule and mean values were determined. The results were compared with final histopathological diagnoses. In histopathological examinations, 125 (31.97%) of 391 nodules were malignant and 266 (68.03%) were benign. Of these histopathologically benign nodules, 189 (%71.05) were also probably benign according to elastosonographic scoring (scores of 1, 2, or 3), while 77 (28.95%) were probably malignant (scores of 4 or 5). Among 125 histopathologically malignant nodules, 52 (41.60%) were probably benign and 73 (58.40%) were probably malignant according to elastosonographic scoring. There was a significant relation between scoring and histopathological findings (χ(2) = 36.513; P < 0.001). Accordingly, sensitivity and specificity of ES scoring were 58.4 and 71.0%, respectively. ROC analysis value obtained for strain ratios in LA (AUC: 75.5%; P < 0.001) had a higher significance compared to ROC analysis value obtained for strain ratios in TA (AUC: 66.0%). Thus, ROC analysis evaluation was applied only for SI in LA. The optimal SI cut-off value in LA for all the nodules was found to be 16.709 (sensitivity: 73.4%, specificity: 70.0%) (AUC: 75.4 ± 0.03%; 70.2-80.5%). SI cut-off value corresponding to 90% sensitivity in this axis was 4.516 (specificity: 35.7%). Sensitivity and specificity of SI values that were determined according to morphological features of nodules in gray-scale ultrasonography were higher. For hypoechoic nodules with microcalcifications and without a halo, SI cut-off value, sensitivity, and specificity were 17.020, 84.3, and 81.1%, respectively. Our study is the first clinical-wide series study that measured, used, and compared the ES scoring and SI cut-off values for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant thyroid nodules. This study indicates that measurement of SI with ES as a noninvasive procedure may be used as an adjunctive method to the conventional methods for the differential diagnosis of thyroid nodules.
BackgroundDermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) of the vulva is a rare low-grade soft tissue sarcoma. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of vulvar DFSP were essentially unreported in the literature.Case reportWe report a DFSP of vulva with its clinical, histological and MRI features. As far we know this is the first case of histologically confirmed vulvar DFSP presenting with MR images. The diagnosis of DFSP is usually made by histopathologic and clinical findings.ConclusionsMRI is useful both for the diagnosis of DFSP and following up the patients since it has high soft tissue resolution and no risk of radiation exposure. With MRI the relation to the adjacent anatomical structures, extension and depth of the tumour and possible lymph node involvement can also be demonstrated.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.