Ultrasonic S-Detect mode for the evaluation of thyroid nodules: A meta-analysis. Issue 34 (26th August 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bian, Jinyi; Wang, Ruyue; Lin, Mingxin
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 101:Issue 34(2022)
• Page Start: e29991
• Publication Date: 2022-08-26
• Subjects: meta-analysis -- thyroid nodule -- TI-RADS classification -- ultrasonic S-Detect mode -- ultrasonography; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000029991
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the value of ultrasonic S-Detect mode for the evaluation of thyroid nodules. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Chinese biomedical databases from inception to August 31, 2021. Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA version 14.0 and Meta-Disc version 1.4 software. We calculated the summary statistics for sensitivity (Sen), specificity (Spe), summary receiver operating characteristic curve, and the area under the curve, and compared the area under the curve between ultrasonic S-Detect mode and thyroid imaging report and data system (TI-RADS) for the diagnosis of thyroid nodules. As a systematic review summarizing the results of previous studies, this study does not need the informed consent of patients or the approval of the ethics review committee. Results: Fifteen studies that met all inclusion criteria were included in this meta-analysis. A total of 924 thyroid malignant nodules and 1228 thyroid benign nodules were assessed. All thyroid nodules were histologically confirmed after examination. The pooled Sen and Spe of TI-RADS were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.85–0.91) and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.78–0.90), respectively; the pooled Sen and Spe of S-Detect were 0.88 (95% CI = 0.85–0.90) and 0.73 (95% CI = 0.63–0.81), respectively. The areas under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of TI-RADS and S-Detect were 0.9370 (standard error [SE] = 0.0110) and 0.9128 (SE = 0.0147), respectively, between which there was no significant difference (Z = 1.318; SE = 0.0184; P = .1875). We found no evidence of publication bias ( t = 0.36, P = .72). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis indicates that ultrasonic S-Detect mode may have high diagnostic accuracy and may have certain clinical application value, especially for young doctors.