SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2011
Imaging in assessing hepatic and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
66 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluation of FAPI PET imaging in gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Theranostics · 2023Pooled it
- The predictive value of radiomics-based machine learning for peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Gallium-68-labeled fibroblast activation protein inhibitor PET in gastrointestinal cancer: insights into diagnosis and management.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Trial
- Trial
- [Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Personalized PET Imaging in Gastric Cancer: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses to Guide Radiopharmaceutical Selection and Clinical Indication.International journal of biomedical imaging · 2026Review
- The levels of plasma MiR-9 and MiR-106a are associated with the development of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients with gastric cancer.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Clinical implications of DNA ploidy, stroma, and nucleotyping in predicting peritoneal metastasis risk for gastric cancer.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Impact ofJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Application and progress of nomograms in gastric cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Partial cystectomy as a surgical option for colorectal cancer patients with pathological bladder invasion: an original retrospective study.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Cross-sectional imaging of gastric cancer: pearls, pitfalls and lessons learned from multidisciplinary conference.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Review
- Multitask machine learning-based tumor-associated collagen signatures predict peritoneal recurrence and disease-free survival in gastric cancer.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024Article
- Impact of laparoscopic ultrasound during PIPAC directed treatment of unresectable peritoneal metastasis.Pleura and peritoneum · 2024Article
- Pathological Complete Response Achieved with XELOX Chemotherapy, HIPEC, and Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy in Stage IV Gastric Adenocarcinoma with Peritoneal Metastasis: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Review
- Impact ofAnnals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparative assessment of the diagnostic efficacy of [Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Systematic review of diagnostic tools for peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer-staging laparoscopy and its alternatives.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Article
6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHepatic and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer are operation contraindications. Systematic review to provide an overview of imaging in predicting the status of liver and peritoneum pre-therapeutically is essential.
methodsA systematic review of relevant literatures was performed in Pubmed/Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and the China Biological Medicine Databases. QUADAS was used for assessing the methodological quality of included studies and the bivariate model was used for this meta-analysis.
resultsTotally 33 studies were included (8 US studies, 5 EUS studies, 22 CT studies, 2 MRI studies and 5 18F-FDG PET studies) and the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. The result of meta-analysis showed that CT is the most sensitive imaging method [0.74 (95% CI: 0.59-0.85)] with a high rate of specificity [0.99 (95% CI: 0.97-1.00)] in detecting hepatic metastasis, and EUS is the most sensitive imaging modality [0.34 (95% CI: 0.10-0.69) ] with a specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.87-0.99) in detecting peritoneal metastasis. Only two eligible MRI studies were identified and the data were not combined. The two studies found that MRI had both high sensitivity and specificity in detecting liver metastasis.
conclusionUS, EUS, CT and 18F-FDG PET did not obtain consistently high sensitivity and specificity in assessing liver and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer. The value of laparoscopy, PET/CT, DW-MRI, and new PET tracers such as 18F-FLT needs to be studied in future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.