Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33830443›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2021

Clinical significance of multi-slice spiral CT, MRI combined with gastric contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of T staging of gastric cancer.

Q -Z Gai, X -L Li, N Li, L Li, Z Meng, A -F Chen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Early detection of gastric cancerFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Q -Z GaiDepartment of Imaging, Yantaishan Hospital, Yantai, 264000, China.
X -L LiImage Center, Dongchangfu People's Hospital, Liaocheng People's Hospital, Liaocheng, 252000, China.
N LiICU, Affiliated Qingdao Central Hospital, Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266000, China.
L LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Zhangqiu District People's Hospital, Jinan, 250200, China.
Z MengDepartment of Ultrasound, Zhangqiu District People's Hospital, Jinan, 250200, China.
A -F ChenDepartment of Ultrasound, East Hospital, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, No .5 Donghai Middle Road, Qingdao, 266071, China. chenaifangqd@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7387-4276

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo explore the application value of multi-slice spiral CT (MSCT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with gastric contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of T staging of gastric cancer.

methodsThe subjects of study were 109 gastric cancer patients with T stages admitted to our hospital for diagnosis and treatment from December 2016 to December 2018. All the patients were examined with MSCT, MRI and gastric contrast-enhanced ultrasonography before operation to observe corresponding imaging results. T staging of gastric cancer patients was conducted according to the examination results, which was then compared with postoperative pathological staging. It was performed to analyze the accuracy of the three diagnostic methods and combined diagnosis of gastric cancer T staging.

resultsThe sensitivity of MSCT in the diagnosis of T staging of gastric cancer was 60.00%, 67.74%, 72.22%, 76.47%, the specificity was 95.24%, 88.46%, 86.30%, 94.56% and the diagnostic coincidence rate was 87.16%, 82.57%, 81.65%, 91.74%; the sensitivity of MRI in the diagnosis of T staging of gastric cancer was 68.00%, 70.97%, 77.78%, 76.47%, the specificity was 92.86%, 88.46%, 91.78%, 95.65%, and the diagnostic coincidence rate was 87.16%, 83.49%, 87.16%, 92.66%; the sensitivity of gastric contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of T staging of gastric cancer was 80.00%, 83.87%, 86.11%, 82.35%, the specificity was 97.62%, 92.31%, 91.78%, 97.83%, and the diagnostic coincidence rate was 93.58%, 89.91%, 89.91%, 95.41%; the sensitivity of combined MSCT, MRI and gastric contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of T staging of gastric cancer was 88.00%, 93.55%, 97.22%, 94.12%; the specificity was 100%, 97.44%, 95.89%, 98.91%; and the diagnostic coincidence rate was 97.25%, 96.33%, 96.33%, 98.17%, respectively. Statistical analysis revealed that the sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic coincidence rate of combined detection of the three methods were significantly higher than those of single detection (P < 0.05).

conclusionCombined use of MSCT, MRI and gastric contrast-enhanced ultrasonography can significantly improve the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic coincidence rate of T staging of gastric cancer. It may provide a certain reference value for guiding the selection of clinical therapeutic approaches and evaluation of curative effect.

Indexed as

AdultAgedContrast MediaFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedMultidetector Computed TomographyMultimodal ImagingNeoplasm StagingSensitivity and SpecificityStomach NeoplasmsUltrasonographyContrast MediaCombined diagnosisGastric cancerGastric contrast-enhanced ultrasonographyMagnetic resonance imagingMulti-slice spiral CT

Identifiers

PMID33830443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.