Skip to main content

Table 1 Diagnostic performances of conventional US and a combination of conventional US and USE for diagnosing thyroid malignancy

From: Thyroid nodule ultrasound: technical advances and future horizons

First author, year (citation) n (% malignant) Type Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) Accuracy (%) PPV (%) NPV (%)
US US/USE US US/USE US US/USE US US/USE US US/USE
Sebag, 2010 [46] 146 (19.9) SWE 51.9 81.5 97 97 ND ND 82.4 88 88.1 95
Trimboli, 2012 [49] 498 (25.3) SE 85 97 54 34 62 50 38 33 91 97
Ragazzoni, 2012 [52] 132 (30.3) SE 70 85 92.4 83.7 85.6 84.1 80 69.4 87.6 92.8
Cappelli, 2012 [51] 159 (9.4) SE 80 100 75 70.8 75.4 73.6 25 26.3 97.2 100
Moon, 2012 [37] 703 (30.8) SE 91.7 92.2 66.7 65 74.4 73.4 55.1 54.1 94.7 94.9
Unluturk, 2012 [35] 237 (24.5) SE 69 41 85 93 81 81 60 67 89 83
Veyrieres, 2012 [50] 297 (11.8) SWE 77.1 97.1 58 55.3 ND ND 19.7 22.5 95 99.3
Shweel, 2013 [48] 66 (24.2) SE 92 95.4 72.9 94.8 60.1 95.2 95 82.3 63.1 98.8
Russ, 2013 [47] 991 (6.7) SE 95.7 98.5 61 44.7 62 48.3 ND ND 99.7 99.8
Garino, 2014 [54] 108 (30.6) SE 61 88 83 77 76 81 61 63 83 94
Liu, 2014 [53] 331 (30.5) SWE 76.2 87.1 83 73.9 81 78 66.4 59.5 88.8 92.9
  1. Only published studies with both documented sensitivity and NPV results are shown, and those with high sensitivities and NPVs (>95%) are indicated in bold. US conventional US, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, US/USE combined conventional US and USE, SE strain USE, SWE shear wave elastography, ND not documented