4.3 Article

Follow-up of benign thyroid nodules confirmed by ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy after inconclusive cytology on fine-needle aspiration biopsy

Journal

ULTRASONOGRAPHY
Volume 42, Issue 1, Pages 121-128

Publisher

KOREAN SOC ULTRASOUND MEDICINE
DOI: 10.14366/usg.22115

Keywords

Thyroid nodule; Biopsy; Core needle; Ultrasonography; Benign

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to follow benign thyroid nodules confirmed by ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy after inconclusive cytology on fine-needle aspiration. The results showed that these nodules had stable status during the follow-up period, and repeated biopsy could be helpful in their management.
Purpose: The goal of this study was to follow benign thyroid nodules confirmed by ultrasound (US)-guided core needle biopsy (CNB) after inconclusive cytology on fine-needle aspiration (FNA) Methods: Sixty-two thyroid nodules from 62 patients with CNB-confirmed benign histology that initially had inconclusive cytology on FNA were retrospectively included. The thyroid nodules were followed for 38.7 months (median, 27.5 months; range, 6 to 101 months), and the US findings of biopsied nodules, such as the interval change in size, US characteristics, and imaging category based on the Korean Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (K-TIRADS), were evaluated. In addition, patients' clinical records were reviewed for any further management or newly diagnosed thyroid malignancy. Results: Among 62 cases, three (4.8%) showed interval size growth, while 59 (95.2%) demonstrated no interval change or a decrease in size. There was no upgrade of K-TIRADS category or any newly diagnosed malignancy during the follow-up period. Conclusion: US-guided CNB-confirmed benign thyroid nodules with inconclusive cytology on FNA showed a stable status during follow-up, and repeated CNB could be helpful in the management of nodules with inconclusive cytology on FNA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available