Inaccuracy of Thyroid to Background Uptake Ratio in Evaluating Technetium-99m-pertechnetate Thyroid Uptake and Establishing an Improved Algorithm

Q3 Medicine
Changyin Wang, Yanfen Zhao, Ying Shen
{"title":"Inaccuracy of Thyroid to Background Uptake Ratio in Evaluating Technetium-99m-pertechnetate Thyroid Uptake and Establishing an Improved Algorithm","authors":"Changyin Wang, Yanfen Zhao, Ying Shen","doi":"10.22038/AOJNMB.2019.12734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective(s): The aim of this study was to explore the accuracy of thyroid to background uptake ratio (UR) in the evaluation of 99mTc-pertechnetate thyroid uptake (TcTU) and establishment of an improved algorithm. Methods: This study was conducted on the thyroid images of 322 patients with thyroid diseases and 67 controls. For the purpose of the study, URs of the images were calculated, and then corrected by standardized thyroid area size to establish a corrected uptake ratio (CUR). Subsequently, the accuracy between UR and CUR was compared. Results: The results of linear regression using weighted least squares (using TcTU as a dependent variable and CUR, UR, or thyroid area size as independent variables) showed that CUR (t=105.5, P=0.000), UR (t=31.9, P=0.000), and thyroid area size (t=15.9, P=0.000) are influential factors of TcTU. Furthermore, the standardized coefficient of CUR (β=0.983) was obviously higher than those of UR (β=0.851) and thyroid area size (β=0.629). The linear goodness-of-fit between CUR and TcTU (R=0.983) was better than that between UR and TcTU (R=0.851). In addition, the total concordance rate between CUR and TcTU (96.7%) was significantly higher than that between UR and TcTU (83.0%; χ2=42.9, P=0.000). Discordance rates of CUR in large thyroid area (1.4% vs. 13.4%, χ2=17.0, P=0.000) and small thyroid area (3.3% vs. 42.2 %, χ2=44.3, P=0.000), were significantly lower than that of UR. In the abnormal thyroid areas, the discordance rates of UR obviously increased as compared to those of CUR. The UR overestimated the thyroid uptake in small thyroid areas and underestimated it in large thyroid areas. Conclusion: Based on the findings, CUR is more accurate than UR in measuring 99mTcO4ˉ thyroid uptake; accordingly, it is more significant in the diagnosis of thyroid disease.","PeriodicalId":8503,"journal":{"name":"Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Biology","volume":"7 1","pages":"160 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/AOJNMB.2019.12734","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective(s): The aim of this study was to explore the accuracy of thyroid to background uptake ratio (UR) in the evaluation of 99mTc-pertechnetate thyroid uptake (TcTU) and establishment of an improved algorithm. Methods: This study was conducted on the thyroid images of 322 patients with thyroid diseases and 67 controls. For the purpose of the study, URs of the images were calculated, and then corrected by standardized thyroid area size to establish a corrected uptake ratio (CUR). Subsequently, the accuracy between UR and CUR was compared. Results: The results of linear regression using weighted least squares (using TcTU as a dependent variable and CUR, UR, or thyroid area size as independent variables) showed that CUR (t=105.5, P=0.000), UR (t=31.9, P=0.000), and thyroid area size (t=15.9, P=0.000) are influential factors of TcTU. Furthermore, the standardized coefficient of CUR (β=0.983) was obviously higher than those of UR (β=0.851) and thyroid area size (β=0.629). The linear goodness-of-fit between CUR and TcTU (R=0.983) was better than that between UR and TcTU (R=0.851). In addition, the total concordance rate between CUR and TcTU (96.7%) was significantly higher than that between UR and TcTU (83.0%; χ2=42.9, P=0.000). Discordance rates of CUR in large thyroid area (1.4% vs. 13.4%, χ2=17.0, P=0.000) and small thyroid area (3.3% vs. 42.2 %, χ2=44.3, P=0.000), were significantly lower than that of UR. In the abnormal thyroid areas, the discordance rates of UR obviously increased as compared to those of CUR. The UR overestimated the thyroid uptake in small thyroid areas and underestimated it in large thyroid areas. Conclusion: Based on the findings, CUR is more accurate than UR in measuring 99mTcO4ˉ thyroid uptake; accordingly, it is more significant in the diagnosis of thyroid disease.
甲状腺对背景摄取比的不准确性评估锝-99m-高锝甲状腺摄取及改进算法的建立
目的:探讨甲状腺与背景摄取比(UR)在99mtc -高technetate甲状腺摄取(TcTU)评价中的准确性,并建立一种改进算法。方法:对322例甲状腺疾病患者和67例对照者的甲状腺图像进行研究。为了本研究的目的,计算图像的URs,然后通过标准化甲状腺面积大小进行校正,以建立校正摄取比(CUR)。随后,比较UR和CUR的准确率。结果:加权最小二乘线性回归(以TcTU为因变量,以CUR、UR、甲状腺面积大小为自变量)结果显示,CUR (t=105.5, P=0.000)、UR (t=31.9, P=0.000)、甲状腺面积(t=15.9, P=0.000)是TcTU的影响因素。此外,CUR的标准化系数(β=0.983)明显高于UR (β=0.851)和甲状腺面积大小(β=0.629)。CUR与TcTU的线性拟合优度(R=0.983)优于UR与TcTU的线性拟合优度(R=0.851)。此外,CUR与TcTU的总一致性率(96.7%)显著高于UR与TcTU的总一致性率(83.0%;χ2 = 42.9,P = 0.000)。甲状腺大区(1.4%比13.4%,χ2=17.0, P=0.000)和甲状腺小区(3.3%比42.2%,χ2=44.3, P=0.000)的CUR不符合率均显著低于UR。在甲状腺异常区域,UR的不一致率明显高于CUR, UR在小甲状腺区域高估了甲状腺摄取,在大甲状腺区域低估了甲状腺摄取。结论:基于本研究结果,CUR比UR更准确地测量99mTcO4 - 1甲状腺摄取;因此,它在甲状腺疾病的诊断中更有意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Biology
Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Biology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信