ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2022
Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical practice guidelines for duodenal cancer 2025.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAdequate TNM-staging is important to determine prognosis and treatment planning of duodenal adenocarcinoma. Although current guidelines advise contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma, literature about diagnostic tests is sparse.
methodsIn this retrospective single-center cohort study, we analyzed the real life performance of routine CECT for TNM-staging and the assessment of resectability of duodenal adenocarcinoma. Intraoperative findings and pathological staging served as reference standard for resectability, T-, and N-staging. Biopsies,
resultsFifty-two consecutive patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma were included, 26 patients underwent resection. Half of the tumors were isodense to normal duodenum on CECT. The tumor was initially missed in 7/52 patients (13%) on CECT. The correct T-stage was assigned with CECT in 14/26 patients (54%), N-stage in 11/26 (42%), and the M-stage in 42/52 (81%). T-stage was underestimated in (27%). The sensitivity for detecting lymph node metastases was only 24%, specificity was 78%. Seventeen percent of patients had indeterminate liver or lung lesions on CECT. Surgery with curative intent was started in 32 patients, but six patients (19%) could not be resected due to unexpected local invasion or metastases.
conclusionRadiologists and clinicians have to be aware that routine CECT is insufficient for staging and determining resectability in patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma. CECT underestimates T-stage and N-stage, and M-stage is often unclear, resulting in futile surgery in 19% of patients. Alternative strategies are required to improve staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma. We propose to combine multiphase hypotonic duodenography CT with MRI.
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.