1naresh
Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) ) 1nareshArray ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) )Table 2:Demographics of 5 patients whose nodules had benign cytology results and were positive for the BRAF V600E mutation
No. Age (yr) Sex No. of Suspicious US Features Size of the Nodules (mm) Pathology Results 1 48 F 1 5.3 Nodule goiter 2 39 F 2 11 Fibrotic nodule with calcification 3 45 M 2 9 Nodule goiter 4 45 M 1 6 Nodule goiter with underlying lymphocytic thyroiditis 5 69 F 3 13 Nodule goiter with underlying lymphocytic thyroiditis