Simplifying risk stratification for thyroid nodules on ultrasound: validation and performance of an artificial intelligence thyroid imaging reporting and data system
Benjamin Wildman-Tobriner , Jichen Yang , Brian C. Allen , Lisa M. Ho , Chad M. Miller , Maciej A. Mazurowski
{"title":"Simplifying risk stratification for thyroid nodules on ultrasound: validation and performance of an artificial intelligence thyroid imaging reporting and data system","authors":"Benjamin Wildman-Tobriner , Jichen Yang , Brian C. Allen , Lisa M. Ho , Chad M. Miller , Maciej A. Mazurowski","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.07.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To validate the performance of a recently created risk stratification system (RSS) for thyroid nodules on ultrasound, the Artificial Intelligence Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (AI TI-RADS).</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>378 thyroid nodules from 320 patients were included in this retrospective evaluation. All nodules had ultrasound images and had undergone fine needle aspiration (FNA). 147 nodules were Bethesda V or VI (suspicious or diagnostic for malignancy), and 231 were Bethesda II (benign). Three radiologists assigned features according to the AI TI-RADS lexicon (same categories and features as the American College of Radiology TI-RADS) to each nodule based on ultrasound images. FNA recommendations using AI TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS were then compared and sensitivity and specificity for each RSS were calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Across three readers, mean sensitivity of AI TI-RADS was lower than ACR TI-RADS (0.69 vs 0.72, p < 0.02), while mean specificity was higher (0.40 vs 0.37, p < 0.02). Overall total number of points assigned by all three readers decreased slightly when using AI TI-RADS (5,998 for AI TI-RADS vs 6,015 for ACR TI-RADS), including more values of 0 to several features.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>AI TI-RADS performed similarly to ACR TI-RADS while eliminating point assignments for many features, allowing for simplification of future TI-RADS versions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"53 6","pages":"Pages 695-699"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363018824001105/pdfft?md5=fe14e9d3f34bb79cf92b3bf4aa953afd&pid=1-s2.0-S0363018824001105-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363018824001105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
To validate the performance of a recently created risk stratification system (RSS) for thyroid nodules on ultrasound, the Artificial Intelligence Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (AI TI-RADS).
Materials and methods
378 thyroid nodules from 320 patients were included in this retrospective evaluation. All nodules had ultrasound images and had undergone fine needle aspiration (FNA). 147 nodules were Bethesda V or VI (suspicious or diagnostic for malignancy), and 231 were Bethesda II (benign). Three radiologists assigned features according to the AI TI-RADS lexicon (same categories and features as the American College of Radiology TI-RADS) to each nodule based on ultrasound images. FNA recommendations using AI TI-RADS and ACR TI-RADS were then compared and sensitivity and specificity for each RSS were calculated.
Results
Across three readers, mean sensitivity of AI TI-RADS was lower than ACR TI-RADS (0.69 vs 0.72, p < 0.02), while mean specificity was higher (0.40 vs 0.37, p < 0.02). Overall total number of points assigned by all three readers decreased slightly when using AI TI-RADS (5,998 for AI TI-RADS vs 6,015 for ACR TI-RADS), including more values of 0 to several features.
Conclusion
AI TI-RADS performed similarly to ACR TI-RADS while eliminating point assignments for many features, allowing for simplification of future TI-RADS versions.
期刊介绍:
Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology covers important and controversial topics in radiology. Each issue presents important viewpoints from leading radiologists. High-quality reproductions of radiographs, CT scans, MR images, and sonograms clearly depict what is being described in each article. Also included are valuable updates relevant to other areas of practice, such as medical-legal issues or archiving systems. With new multi-topic format and image-intensive style, Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology offers an outstanding, time-saving investigation into current topics most relevant to radiologists.