ArticleAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2022
Differential diagnoses of gallbladder tumors using CT-based deep learning.
Article in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- GBCapsNet: A calibrated capsule network for automated gallbladder disease diagnosis via ultrasound imaging.PloS one · 2026Article
- Machine learning model for differentiating xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis and gallbladder cancer in multicenter largescale study.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Deep learning-based segmentation of gallbladder cancer on abdominal computed tomography scans: a multicenter study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- MSFE-GallNet-X: a multi-scale feature extraction-based CNN Model for gallbladder disease analysis with enhanced explainability.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Early detection of gallbladder cancer: Current status and future perspectives.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Update on the Role of Imaging in the Diagnosis, Staging, and Prognostication of Gallbladder Cancer.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025Review
- Prediction of the Therapeutic Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Rectal Cancer Using a Deep Learning Model.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2025Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence in biliary tract cancers.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Deep-learning models for differentiation of xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis and gallbladder cancer on ultrasound.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Differential diagnoses of gallbladder tumors using CT-based deep learning.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The differential diagnosis between gallbladder cancer (GBC) and xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis (XGC) remains quite challenging, and can possibly lead to improper surgery. This study aimed to distinguish between XGC and GBC by combining computed tomography (CT) images and deep learning (DL) to maximize the therapeutic success of surgery. Methods: We collected a dataset, including preoperative CT images, from 28 cases of GBC and 21 XGC patients undergoing surgery at our facility. It was subdivided into training and validation (n = 40), and test (n = 9) datasets. We built a CT patch-based discriminating model using a residual convolutional neural network and employed 5-fold cross-validation. The discriminating performance of the model was analyzed in the test dataset. Results: Of the 40 patients in the training dataset, GBC and XGC were observed in 21 (52.5%), and 19 (47.5%) patients, respectively. A total of 61 126 patches were extracted from the 40 patients. In the validation dataset, the average sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 98.8%, 98.0%, and 98.5%, respectively. Furthermore, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.9985. In the test dataset, which included 11 738 patches, the discriminating accuracy for GBC patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) (n = 3) was insufficient (61.8%). However, the discriminating model demonstrated high accuracy (98.2%) and AUC (0.9893) for cases other than those receiving NAC. Conclusion: Our CT-based DL model exhibited high discriminating performance in patients with GBC and XGC. Our study proposes a novel concept for selecting the appropriate procedure and avoiding unnecessary invasive measures.
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.