Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct;9(5):1735–1746. doi: 10.21037/gs-20-404

Table 3. Subgroup analyses of studies employing molecular testing and without employing molecular testing.

Category Resection rate Risk of malignancy
With molecular testing Without molecular testing With molecular testing Without molecular testing
% 95% CI I2 % 95% CI I2 % 95% CI I2 % 95% CI I2
Nondiagnostic 29.8* 18.5–44.2* 41.5* 10.7* 7.9–14.4* 47.2* 58.6 37.7–76.8 14.2 31.6 21.9–43.3 0
Benign 4.3 0.9–19.2 0 11.1 6.7–17.9 0 36.4* 20.7–55.7* 0* 11.6* 8.2–16.2* 11.6*
AUS/FLUS 36.8 25.4–49.8 0 29.5 24.1–35.4 27.1 76.1* 65.2–84.4* 30.9* 47.1* 38.2–56.2* 5.4*
FN/SFN 65.7 49.3–79.1 0 53.7 43.0–64.0 0 56.4* 36.7–74.2* 1.1* 31.4* 26.5–36.7* 16.6*
SM 84.7* 72.1–92.2* 54.2* 63.0* 56.6–68.9* 39.4* 96.3* 92.8–98.2* 0* 85.3* 77.3–90.9* 0*
Malignant 86.0 76.3–92.1 62.3 70.4 63.4–76.6 55.9 99.3 97.8–99.8 0 97.8 97.2–98.2 84.8

*, indicate a significant difference between two subgroups of using and not using molecular testing since the 95% confidence intervals do not overlap each other. AUS/FLUS, atypia of undetermined significance/follicular lesion of undetermined significance; FN/SFN, follicular neoplasm/suspicious for a follicular neoplasm; SM, suspicious of malignancy; CI, confidence interval.