English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

. Material ve Method ➢ Fourty-four exophytic and 34 non-exophytic thyroid nodules in which fine needle aspiration biopsy was indicated throughout 3 months were evaluated prospectively. Mean nodule size was similar in two groups (18.83±8.71 mm and 15.28±7,57 mm, p=0.173). The ratio of presence of peripheral hypoechoic halo and marginal irregularity was also similar in both group (p=0.512 and p=0.153, respectively). Microcalcification was present in 21.4% and 29.4% of exophytic and non-exophytic nodules, respectively (p=0.424). Macrocalcification was detected in 4.5% of exophytic and 11.8% of non-exophytic nodules (p=0.111). 47.6% of exophytic nodules was hypoechoic and 52.4% was isoechoic. 47.1% of non-exophytic nodules was hypoechoic and 52.9% was isoechoic. Color flow doppler pattern was defined as non-vascular, peripheral, central, or of mixed type and was similar in both groups (p=0.138). Cytopathologic results of exophytic nodules were 75% benign, 4.3% follicular lesion or atypia with undetermined significance, 2.3% suspicious for malignancy, 2.3% malign, and 15.9% non-diagnostic. In non-exophytic group, 79.4% was benign and 20.6% was non-diagnostic (p=0.497).

Ultrasonographical and cytological features of exophytic thyroid nodules: do exophytic nodules pretend to be malignant?