Abstract
Objective To investigate the difference between an artificial intelligence (AI) system, fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytopathology, BRAFV600E mutation analysis and combined method of the latter two in thyroid nodule diagnosis.
Methods Ultrasound images of 490 thyroid nodules (378 patients) with postsurgical pathology or twice of consistent combined FNA examination outcomes with a half-year interval, which were considered as gold standard, were collected and analyzed. The diagnostic efficacies of an AI diagnostic system and FNA-based methods were evaluated in terms of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, κ coefficient compared to the gold standard.
Results The malignancy threshold of 0.53 for an AI system was selected according to the optimization of Youden index based on a retrospective cohort of 346 nodules and then applied for a prospective cohort of 144 nodules. The combined method of FNA cytopathology according to Bethesda risk stratification system and BRAFV600E mutation analysis showed no significant difference in comparison with the AI diagnostic system in accuracy for both the retrospective and prospective cohort in our single center study. Besides, for the 33 indeterministic Bethesda system category III and IV nodules included in our study, the AI system showed no significant difference in comparison with the BRAFV600E mutation analysis.
Conclusion The evaluated AI diagnostic system showed similar diagnostic performance to FNA cytopathology combined with and BRAFV600E mutation analysis. Given its advantages in ease of operation, time efficiency, and noninvasiveness for thyroid nodule screening as well as the wide availability of ultrasonography, it can be widely applied in all levels of hospitals and clinics to assist radiologists for thyroid nodule diagnosis and is expected to reduce the need for relatively invasive FNA biopsies and thereby reducing the associated risks and side effects as well as to shorten the diagnostic time.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics committee/IRB of Hangzhou First People's Hospital gave ethical approval for this work (ZN-20220301-0042-01).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors