ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2023
Identification of gastric schwannoma and non-metastatic gastric stromal tumor by CT: a single-institution retrospective diagnostic test.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- A diagnostic model based on clinical and enhanced computed tomography features to identify gastric schwannoma and gastric stromal tumor of different sizes: a multi-institution retrospective study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Gastric schwannoma with post-surgical gastroparesis: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gastric schwannoma (GS) was a rare mesenchymal tumor that was difficult to distinguish from a non-metastatic gastric stromal tumor (GST). The nomogram constructed by CT features had an advantage in the differential diagnosis of gastric malignant tumors. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective analysis of their respective computed tomography (CT) features. Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-institution review of resected GS and non-metastatic GST between January 2017 and December 2020. Patients who were pathologically confirmed after surgery and underwent CT within two weeks before surgery were selected. The exclusion criteria were as follows: incomplete clinical data; CT images that were incomplete or of poor quality. A binary logistic regression model was built for analysis. Through univariate and multivariate analysis, CT image features were evaluated to determine the significant differences between GS and GST. Results: The study population comprised 203 consecutive patients (29 with GS and 174 with GST). There were significant differences in gender distribution (P=0.042) and symptoms (P=0.002). Besides, GST tended to involve the presence of necrosis (P=0.003) and lymph nodes (P=0.003). The area under the curve (AUC) value of unenhanced CT (CTU) was 0.708 [95% confidence interval (CI): 62.10-79.56%], the AUC value of venous phase CT (CTP) was 0.774 (95% CI: 69.45-85.34%), and the AUC value of venous phase enhancement (CTPU) was 0.745 (95% CI: 65.87-83.06%). CTP was the most specific feature, with a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 66%. The ratio of long diameter to short diameter (LD/SD) was significantly different (P=0.003). The AUC of the binary logistic regression model was 0.904. Multivariate analysis showed that necrosis and LD/SD were independent factors affecting the identification of GS and GST. Conclusions: LD/SD was a novel distinguishing feature between GS and non-metastatic GST. In conjunction with CTP, LD/SD, location, growth pattern, necrosis, and lymph node, a nomogram was constructed to predict.
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.