Skip to main content

The diagnostic value of ultrasonography in detection of different types of thyroid nodules



This article discusses the importance of high frequency ultrasonography in detection of different types of thyroid nodules considering only the histopathological examination of the surgical specimens as the final diagnosis. We studied 50 patients referred to ENT clinic with a thyroid nodule. Ultrasonography and ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy were done to all the patients. Thyroid surgery was done according to FNAB results.


From 50 thyroid specimens, the US could predict the malignancy in 18 specimens. By histopathology, only 16 specimens were malignant, and 34 were benign thyroid disease. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of US were 100%, 94.12%, and 96% respectively. The most suspicious ultrasongraphic feature was microcalcification followed by taller than wider (T ˃ W).


High frequency ultrasound is a very important tool to predict the malignant possibility during thyroid nodule evaluation.


The thyroid nodule (TN) is a discrete lesion that could be distinct radiologically and pathologically from the normal thyroid parenchyma [1]. It is considered the most common abnormality in the endocrine system. Using ultrasonography (US) in thyroid nodule detection has raised the nodule prevalence to reach 67%. Seven to fifteen percent of thyroid nodules are malignant [2, 3].

The current goal in the TN evaluation is to determine whether it is benign or malignant [4]. Usually, the US is the first choice among the imaging studies during TN assessment followed by ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB), and mostly the surgery decision or leaving the nodule alone is dependent on the FNAB result. However, FNAB has several limitations including inadequate sampling, operator dependency, and false negative cytology rates (10–30%) [5,6,7,8].

Recently, several studies have been performed using high frequency ultrasonography to determine suspicious features of malignant TN like taller than wider in shape, microcalcifications, solid texture, central vascularity, hypoechogenicity, and irregular margin [4, 9,10,11].

The purpose of this study is to determine the diagnostic value of US in the evaluation of TN in comparison with the final histopathological examination of thyroid surgical specimen.



A total of fifty patients aged from 20 to 50 years old with equivocal or suspicious US/FNAB results underwent hemi-thyroidectomy. Malignant TN (proved by FNAB) underwent total thyroidectomy.

High frequency ultrasonography of thyroid gland

High frequency US was performed by radiologist with more than 3 years of experience in thyroid gland ultrasonographic assessment using high-resolution ultrasound equipment using 7–15 MHz linear transducer in transverse and longitudinal planes. Each TN was evaluated according to the site, size, and shape.

The nodular features were classified for:

  1. 1.

    Shape: oval or rounded

  2. 2.

    Taller than wider (T > W) or wider than taller (W˂T)

  3. 3.

    Echogenicity as isoechoic, hypoechoic, hyperechoic, or anechoic

  4. 4.

    Echotexture as solid, mixed, or cystic (if the cystic component occupied an area of less than 25%, it was considered as solid, between 25 and 74% as mixed and 75 and 100% as cystic)

  5. 5.

    Presence of microcalcification as “present” or “absent”

  6. 6.

    Presence of macrocalcification as “present” or “absent”

  7. 7.

    Presence of halo: as “present” or “absent”

  8. 8.

    Regularity of nodule margin as regular or irregular

  9. 9.

    Nodal vascularity: type І was absent vascularity, type ІІ was mixed type (central and peripheral), and type ІІІ was central

  10. 10.

    Cervical lymph nodes: shape, size, and presence of hilum

We considered that the nodule was suspicious for malignancy if it had two or more of suspicious malignant features of US (T > W, microcalcifications, central vascularity, solid texture, hypoechogenecity, and irregular or ill-defined margins).

US-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (US-FNAB)

All patients signed the informed consent after the explanation of the US-FNAB procedure. It was done by experienced radiologist using 22-gauge needle. The specimen was smeared and fixed by alcohol. The cytological analysis was classified according to Bethesda category (Table 1) [12].

Table 1 Bethesda system for cytological diagnosis of thyroid nodules [12]


Patients with FNAB results with Bethesda 4 and 5 underwent hemi-thyroidectomy. Patients with Bethesda 6 underwent total thyroidectomy. The surgical specimens were embedded in paraffin blocks and sectioned. The sections were stained by hematoxylin and eosin stain and examined under light microscope.

Statistical analysis

Data were fed to the computer and analyzed using the IBM SPSS software package version 20.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). Qualitative data were described using number and percent. Quantitative data were described using range (minimum and maximum), mean, standard deviation, and median. Significance of the obtained results was judged at the 5% level. The used tests were chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, F test (ANOVA), and Kruskal-Wallis test.


Demographic data

Fifty patients ranged in age between 22.0 and 50.0 years with a mean age of 38.60 ± 7.43 years. Studied cases were 14 (28.0%) males and 36 (72.0%) females.

Histopathological result

Fifty patients were operated. The result was benign in 34 patients and malignant in 16 patients with different histopathological types (Table 2).

Table 2 Distribution of the studied cases according to histopathology (n = 50)

US suspicious features of thyroid nodule

There was solitary thyroid nodule in the 50 patients, 34 nodules were in the right thyroid lobe, 2 nodules in the isthmus, and 14 nodules in the left lobe. Microcalcification was the most suspicious US features, and Fig. 1 displays the difference of microcalcification and macrocalcification.

Fig. 1

a Thyroid nodule US picture showing macrocalcification in benign TN (arrow). b US picture shows microcalcification in malignant TN (red arrow)

The suspicious malignant US features and their statistical analysis are shown in Table 3 and Fig. 2 in comparison to the final histopathological results.

Table 3 Summarizes sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, accuracy and p value of suspicious US finding of TN
Fig. 2

Distribution of suspicious US features in thyroid nodules

In comparison to the final histopathological results, we could summarize sensitivity and specificity the of US decision in Table (4)

Table 4 Sensitivity and specificity for ultrasound decision in relation to the histopathological results


US-guided FNAB results

The results of FNAB were classified according to Bethesda category in comparison to the histopathological results as follow:

Table 5 summarizes the relation between histopathology and Bethesda system. There was a significant relation between histopathology and Bethesda system.

Table 5 Relation between histopathology and Bethesda

Table 6 summarizes sensitivity and specificity for Bethesda system. The sensitivity of Bethesda system in detecting different types of thyroid nodules was 37.50%, with specificity100.0% and accuracy 80.0%.

Table 6 Sensitivity and specificity for FNAB

Comparison of US findings and FNAB results

The review of all results revealed that the US decision was compatible with the FNAB result in 72% of cases (n = 36). On the other hand, the US was more accurate in 24% cases (n = 12). The FNAB could predict the final histology types in 2 cases better than US (Table 7).

Table 7 Distribution of the studied cases according to final results (n = 50)

One of the cases was benign (Bethesda ІІ) with microcalcifications and T > W features on ultrasonography, and hemi-thyroidectomy was done. The final histopathology report was papillary thyroid carcinoma.


Due to the expanding use of ultrasonography and other imaging modalities, the incidence of thyroid nodule was increased up to 67%. Most of thyroid lumps are benign; malignancy is quite low (3–7%) [13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. Although the thyroid cancer incidence has increased about 2.4-fold over the last three decades by applying the US as a preliminary assessment tool of thyroid gland lesions, this malignancy rate may be not actually estimated because there is an overlap between the gold standard investigation in the diagnosis of primary thyroid malignancy [8, 20,21,22,23,24].

The conflict is always between FNAB and US. Although the FNAB is simple, economic and available way, it has limitations. It causes physical and psychological discomfort because of its invasiveness [8]. The most relevant restriction is the intermediate result in 10 to 30% of cases [25]. Non-diagnostic FNAB or false negative results may be to low cellularity, small sized nodules, and cystic nature of nodules or due to inexperience of the aspirator or the cytologist [26]. Also, the FNAB failed in distinguishing between follicular adenoma and follicular carcinoma, which will not be achieved without intracapsular or intravascular invasion proof. The only tool to prove this invasion is the final histopathological analysis after surgical removal of thyroid specimen [27,28,29].

About the ultrasonographic assessment of thyroid nodule, it is well established that no single sonographic feature has adequate diagnostic accuracy in reliably discrimination between malignant nodules from benign ones. Many studies emphasize on the recognition of complex pattern [8, 19, 24, 30, 31]. In this study, we tried to search about the most sensitive suspicious US character of thyroid nodule to avoid unnecessary surgeries or overlooked malignant nodules without definite treatment. The US can see the intanodular structures and compare it to the surrounding neck parts [26].

On reviewing in the literatures, there are some suspicious ultrasongraphic features of thyroid nodule, namely, tall than wider nodules, solid texture, microcalcification, intranodal vascularity, hypoechogenicity, and irregular margin with different statistical accuracy [4, 9,10,11]. The present study results revealed that microcalcification is the best suspicious US thyroid feature that should be relied on during examination. The microcalcification represents the Psammoma body that is very specific for thyroid carcinoma and, especially, for papillary thyroid cancer, and the microcalcification is considered malignant if it is present without posterior shadowing and if it is appeared in the solid part of the TN. The calcification appears in the cystic part which it is considered the comet-tail artifact that is benign feature. Yunus et al. [11] and Salmaslıoğlu et al. [32] found that microcalcification was one of the best specific characters of thyroid malignancy.

The second most appreciated feature is taller than wider nodule. A recent study by Yoon et al. [33] explained this that a taller than wide shape in malignant thyroid nodules and a wider than tall shape in benign nodules are related to the ability of the probe to compress the thyroid nodule during the US examination. Since the benign nodules and cystic nodules are softer and infiltrate less into the surrounding tissue, benign nodules are more easily compressed than malignant nodules [33,34,35,36].

The ill-defined margin was very specific but it showed low sensitivity as it occurred only in 4 cases from 16 malignant nodules. According to Grant et al. [9], this controversy about the ill-defined feature is due to entangled definitions and observer variability. This was on the contrary with Gul [37] who found that the most important US feature to predict malignancy was found to be margin irregularity (with sensitivity 90.2%, specificity 87.3%) followed by hypoechoic pattern.

Central (type 3) vascularity was approved by Doppler US in 8 nodules. The sensitivity of vascularity in detecting different types of thyroid nodules was 50.0%. This result is quite different from Frates’ [38] opinion, which showed that more than 50% of hyper vascular thyroid nodules were benign. Additionally, some malignant might lack central vascularity due to fibrosis according to Moon et al. [39]. Also, the new Doppler US equipment could detect the very minute vessels in thyroid nodule and not only large central ones [40].

The sensitivity of ultrasound in detecting different types of thyroid nodules was 100.0%, with specificity 94.12% and accuracy 96.0%. Also, sensitivity of Bethesda system of FNAB in detecting different types of thyroid nodules was 37.50%, with specificity 100.0% and accuracy 80.0%. Both of FNAB and US results were statistically significant, but the US had better preference than FNAB in diagnosis of 12 malignant cases (Table 7).

Small sample size was a limitation of our study but we tried to overcome this obstacle through that all the subjects underwent hemi or total thyroidectomy. So, the final histopathology was the cut point of diagnosis and not the fine-needle aspiration biopsy that has a lot of debate as being the gold standard diagnostic tool of thyroid nodule.


Ultrasonography is a very essential sensitive tool in detection of thyroid nodule type, especially if it is done by well-experienced radiologist. It has a paramount importance in the successful management of thyroid nodules.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.





Fine-needle aspiration biopsy


Thyroid nodule


  1. 1.

    Tamhane S, Gharib H (2016) Thyroid nodule update on diagnosis and management. Clin Diabetes Endocrinol 2:17

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE et al (2016) 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: The American Thyroid Association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid 26(1):1–133

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Liu Y, Wu H, Zhou Q, Gou J, Xu J, Liu Y et al (2016) Diagnostic value of conventional ultrasonography combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (TI-RADS) 3 and 4 thyroid micronodules. Med Sci Monit 22:3086–3094

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Frates MC, Benson CB, Charboneau JW, Cibas ES, Clark OH, Coleman BG et al (2005) Management of thyroid nodules detected at US: Society of Radiologists in ultrasound consensus conference statement. Radiology 237(3):794–800

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Mehrotra P, McQueen A, Kolla S, Johnson SJ, Richardson DL (2013) Does elastography reduce the need for thyroid FNAs? Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 78(6):942–949

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Choi YJ, Jung I, Min SJ, Kim HJ, Kim JH, Kim S et al (2013) Thyroid nodule with benign cytology: is clinical follow-up enough? PLoS One 8(5):e63834

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Chernyavsky VS, Shanker BA, Davidov T, Crystal JS, Eng O, Ibrahim K et al (2012) Is one benign fine needle aspiration enough? Ann Surg Oncol 19(5):1472–1476

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Xia J, Chen H, Li Q, Zhou M, Chen L, Cai Z et al (2017) Ultrasound-based differentiation of malignant and benign thyroid Nodules: an extreme learning machine approach. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 147:37–49

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Grant EG, Tessler FN, Hoang JK, Langer JE, Beland MD, Berland LL et al (2015) Thyroid ultrasound reporting lexicon: white paper of the ACR Thyroid Imaging, Reporting and Data System (TIRADS) Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 12(12 Pt A):1272–1279

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Batawil N, Alkordy T (2014) Ultrasonographic features associated with malignancy in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules. Eur J Surg Oncol 40(2):182–186

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Yunus M, Ahmed Z (2010) Significance of ultrasound features in predicting malignant solid thyroid nodules: need for fine-needle aspiration. J Pak Med Assoc 60(10):848–853

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Cibas ES, Ali SZ (2017) The 2017 Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. J Am Soc Cytopathol 6(6):217–222

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Arpana POB, Gurung G, Pradhan S (2018) Ultrasound findings in thyroid nodules: a radio-cytopathologic correlation. J Med Ultrasound 26(2):90–93

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Wiest PW, Hartshorne MF, Inskip PD, Crooks LA, Vela BS, Telepak RJ et al (1998) Thyroid palpation versus high-resolution thyroid ultrasonography in the detection of nodules. J Ultrasound Med 17(8):487–496

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Cronan JJ (2008) Thyroid nodules: is it time to turn off the US machines? Radiology 247(3):602–604

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Mortensen JD, Woolner LB, Bennett WA (1955) Gross and microscopic findings in clinically normal thyroid glands. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 15(10):1270–1280

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Hegedus L, Bonnema SJ, Bennedbaek FN (2003) Management of simple nodular goiter: current status and future perspectives. Endocr Rev 24(1):102–132

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Nam-Goong IS, Kim HY, Gong G, Lee HK, Hong SJ, Kim WB et al (2004) Ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration of thyroid incidentaloma: correlation with pathological findings. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 60(1):21–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Papini E, Guglielmi R, Bianchini A, Crescenzi A, Taccogna S, Nardi F et al (2002) Risk of malignancy in nonpalpable thyroid nodules: predictive value of ultrasound and color-Doppler features. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 87(5):1941–1946

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Hayat MJ, Howlader N, Reichman ME, Edwards BK (2007) Cancer statistics, trends, and multiple primary cancer analyses from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. Oncologist 12(1):20–37

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Rego-Iraeta A, Pérez-Méndez LF, Mantinan B, Garcia-Mayor RV (2009) Time trends for thyroid cancer in northwestern Spain: true rise in the incidence of micro and larger forms of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid 19(4):333–340

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Acharya UR, Swapna G, Sree SV, Molinari F, Gupta S, Bardales RH, et al (2014) A review on ultrasound-based thyroid cancer tissue characterization and automated classification. Technol Cancer Res Treat 13 (4):289-301.

  23. 23.

    Song G, Xue F, Zhang C (2015) A model using texture features to differentiate the nature of thyroid nodules on sonography. J Ultrasound Med 34(10):1753–1760

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Wolinski K, Szkudlarek M, Szczepanek-Parulska E, Ruchala M (2014) Usefulness of different ultrasound features of malignancy in predicting the type of thyroid lesions: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. Pol Arch Med Wewn 124(3):97–104

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Cooper DS, Doherty GM, Haugen BR, Kloos RT, Lee SL, Mandel SJ et al (2009) Revised American Thyroid Association management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid 19(11):1167–1214

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Acharya UR, Swapna G, Sree SV, Molinari F, Gupta S, Bardales RH, et al (2014) A review on ultrasound-based thyroid cancer tissue characterization and automated classification. Technol Cancer Res Treat 13 (4):289-301.

  27. 27.

    Suster S (2006) Thyroid tumors with a follicular growth pattern: problems in differential diagnosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 130(7):984–988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Moon WJ, Kwag HJ, Na DG (2009) Are there any specific ultrasound findings of nodular hyperplasia (“leave me alone: lesion) to differentiate it from follicular adenoma? Acta Radiol 50(4):383-388.

  29. 29.

    Rago T, Di Coscio G, Basolo F, Scutari M, Elisei R, Berti P et al (2007) Combined clinical, thyroid ultrasound and cytological features help to predict thyroid malignancy in follicular and Hupsilonrthle cell thyroid lesions: results from a series of 505 consecutive patients. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 66(1):13–20

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Kwak JY, Han KH, Yoon JH, Moon HJ, Son EJ, Park SH et al (2011) Thyroid imaging reporting and data system for US features of nodules: a step in establishing better stratification of cancer risk. Radiology 260(3):892–899

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Peccin S, de Castsro JA, Furlanetto TW, Furtado AP, Brasil BA, Czepielewski MA (2002) Ultrasonography: is it useful in the diagnosis of cancer in thyroid nodules? J Endocrinol Invest 25(1):39–43

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Salmaslioglu A, Erbil Y, Dural C, Issever H, Kapran Y, Ozarmagan S et al (2008) Predictive value of sonographic features in preoperative evaluation of malignant thyroid nodules in a multinodular goiter. World J Surg 32(9):1948–1954

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Yoon SJ, Yoon DY, Chang SK, Seo YL, Yun EJ, Choi CS et al (2010) “Taller-than-wide sign” of thyroid malignancy: comparison between ultrasound and CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194(5):W420–W424

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Moon HJ, Kwak JY, Kim EK, Kim MJ (2011) A taller-than-wide shape in thyroid nodules in transverse and longitudinal ultrasonographic planes and the prediction of malignancy. Thyroid 21(11):1249–1253

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Carcangiu ML, Zampi G, Rosai J (1985) Papillary thyroid carcinoma: a study of its many morphologic expressions and clinical correlates. Pathol Annu 20(Pt 1):1–44

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Isarangkul W (1993) Dense fibrosis. Another diagnostic criterion for papillary thyroid carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 117(6):645–646

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Gul K, Ersoy R, Dirikoc A, Korukluoglu B, Ersoy PE, Aydin R et al (2009) Ultrasonographic evaluation of thyroid nodules: comparison of ultrasonographic, cytological, and histopathological findings. Endocrine 36(3):464–472

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Frates MC, Benson CB, Doubilet PM, Cibas ES, Marqusee E (2003) Can color Doppler sonography aid in the prediction of malignancy of thyroid nodules? J Ultrasound Med 22(2):127–131

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Moon HJ, Kwak JY, Kim MJ, Son EJ, Kim EK (2010) Can vascularity at power Doppler US help predict thyroid malignancy? Radiology 255(1):260–269

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Anil G, Hegde A, Chong FH (2011) Thyroid nodules: risk stratification for malignancy with ultrasound and guided biopsy. Cancer Imaging 11:209–223

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references


Not applicable


The source of funding for this research is the authors’ personal funding.

Author information




A Y: corresponding author, surgical procedures, and data review. M H: Supervisor of research, surgical procedures, and data review. R G: Principal investigator, conduct of study, and data collection. M E: Radiological data analysis and review and conduct of study. M Z: Review of literature and statistical analysis. The authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed Youssef.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent to participate was waived by an IRB (Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine Alexandria University (IRB No. 00012098 (Expire on June 10, 2022), FWA No. 00018699 (Expire on April 2, 2021) Serial number of ethical committee acceptance is 0105764. Date of acceptance is November 16, 2018.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

We have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Youssef, A., Abd-Elmonem, M.H., Ghazy, R.A.M. et al. The diagnostic value of ultrasonography in detection of different types of thyroid nodules. Egypt J Otolaryngol 36, 23 (2020).

Download citation


  • Ultrasound (US)
  • Fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB)
  • Thyroid nodule
  • Microcalcification