ArticleClinical endoscopy2019
Comparison of the Diagnostic Ability of Endoscopic Ultrasonography and Abdominopelvic Computed Tomography in the Diagnosis of Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07078136 (Multicenter Observational Study of a Multimodal AI Model Using EUS, White-Light Endoscopy, and Clinical Data for Diagnosis of Upper GI Mesenchymal Tumors and Risk Stratification of Gastric GISTs), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Multicenter Observational Study of a Multimodal AI Model Using EUS, White-Light Endoscopy, and Clinical Data for Diagnosis of Upper GI Mesenchymal Tumors and Risk Stratification of Gastric GISTs
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Subepithelial Lesion Observed in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Guideline
- Multimodal models based on radiomics and deep learning in the classification of gastric stromal tumors and gastric leiomyomas.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Advanced Gastric Cancer Presenting as a Giant Subepithelial Lesion: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Approach to Gastric Subepithelial Lesions: From Differential Diagnosis to Histologic Confirmation.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Review
- Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Subepithelial Lesions Observed in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Review
- Multimodal artificial intelligence for subepithelial lesion classification and characterization: a multicenter comparative study (with video).BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Advanced endoscopic techniques for esophageal duplication cyst treatment: beyond surgery.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2025Review
- Diagnostic accuracy and influencing factors of microprobe endoscopic ultrasound for gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a multicenter retrospective study.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- [Management of Colorectal Subepithelial Lesions: Differential Diagnosis and Follow-up].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2025Review
- A Lightweight Machine Learning Model for High Precision Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Identification.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Endoscopic calabash technique for gastric mesenchymal tumours: A low hanging fruit or a novel endoscopic technique?World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Correlation of preoperative CT features with intra- and postoperative parameters of endoscopic resection in patients with gastric submucosal tumor (1~3 cm).Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Enhanced dual-mode imaging: Superior photoacoustic and ultrasound endoscopy in live pigs using a transparent ultrasound transducer.Science advances · 2024Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound and Gastric Sub-Epithelial Lesions: Ultrasonographic Features, Tissue Acquisition Strategies, and Therapeutic Management.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Efficacy of EUS-guided keyhole biopsies in diagnosing subepithelial lesions of the upper gastrointestinal tract.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Diagnostic Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) of the Luminal Gastrointestinal Tract.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Advances in Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Gastric Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Review
- The effect of endoscopic ultrasound on the precise selection of endoscopic treatment for submucosal tumors in the upper gastrointestinal tract.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- EUS-Guided Diagnosis of Gastric Subepithelial Lesions, What Is New?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Computed tomography features of gastric leiomyoma versus gastric stromal tumor: a case-control study with propensity score matching.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsEndoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the most efficient imaging modality for gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs). However, abdominopelvic computed tomography (APCT) has other advantages in evaluating the characteristics, local extension, or invasion of SETs to adjacent organs. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic ability of EUS and APCT based on surgical histopathology results.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed data from 53 patients who underwent both EUS and APCT before laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric SETs from January 2010 to December 2017 at a single institution. On the basis of histopathology results, we assessed the diagnostic ability of the 2 tests.
resultsThe overall accuracy of EUS and APCT was 64.2% and 50.9%, respectively. In particular, the accuracy of EUS vs. APCT for the diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), leiomyomas, and ectopic pancreas was 83.9% vs. 74.2%, 37.5% vs. 0.0%, and 57.1% vs. 14.3%, respectively. Most of the incorrect diagnoses with EUS involved hypoechoic lesions originating in the fourth echolayer, with the most common misdiagnosed lesions being GISTs mistaken for leiomyomas and vice versa.
conclusionAPCT showed a lower overall accuracy than EUS; however, APCT remains a useful modality for malignant/potentially malignant gastric SETs.
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.