Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The use of ultrasonography (US) vs cross-sectional imaging for preoperative evaluation of papillary thyroid cancer is debated. OBJECTIVE: To compare thyroid US and computed tomography (CT) in the preoperative evaluation of papillary thyroid cancer for cervical lymph node metastasis (CLNM), as well as extrathyroidal disease extension. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Embase were searched from January 1, 2000, to July 18, 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting on the diagnostic accuracy of US and/or CT in individuals with treatment-naive papillary thyroid cancer for CLNM and/or extrathyroidal disease extension were included. The reference standard was defined as histopathology/cytology or imaging follow-up. Independent title and abstract review (2515 studies) followed by full-text review (145 studies) was completed by multiple investigators. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: PRISMA guidelines were followed. Methodologic and diagnostic accuracy data were abstracted independently by multiple investigators. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool independently and in duplicate. Bivariate random-effects model meta-analysis and multivariable meta-regression modeling was used. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Diagnostic test accuracy of US and CT of the neck for lateral and central compartment CLNM, as well as for extrathyroidal disease extension, determined prior to study commencement. RESULTS: A total of 47 studies encompassing 31 942 observations for thyroid cancer (12 771 with CLNM; 1747 with extrathyroidal thyroid extension) were included; 21 and 26 studies were at low and high risk for bias, respectively. Based on comparative design studies, US and CT demonstrated no significant difference in sensitivity (73% [95% CI, 64%-80%] and 77% [95% CI, 67%-85%], respectively; P = .11) or specificity (89% [95% CI, 80%-94%] and 88% [95% CI, 79%-94%], respectively; P = .79) for lateral compartment CLNM. For central compartment metastasis, sensitivity was higher in CT (39% [95% CI, 27%-52%]) vs US (28% [95% CI, 21%-36%]; P = .004), while specificity was higher in US (95% [95% CI, 92%-98%]) vs CT (87% [95% CI, 77%-93%]; P < .001). Ultrasonography demonstrated a sensitivity of 91% (95% CI, 81%-96%) and specificity of 47% (95% CI, 35%-60%) for extrathyroidal extension. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that further study is warranted of the role of CT for papillary thyroid cancer staging, possibly as an adjunct to US.