ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2025
Computed tomography-based contrast features for distinguishing extra-gastrointestinal stromal tumors from intra-abdominal fibromatosis.
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to define the computed tomography (CT) criteria that distinguish extra-gastrointestinal stromal tumors (eGISTs) from intra-abdominal fibromatosis (IAF).
methodsRetrospective analysis was conducted on CT images obtained from 31 pathologically confirmed cases, including 17 cases of eGISTs and 14 of IAF. Various parameters [e.g., lesion location, contour characteristics, border delineation, enhancement patterns, presence of intralesional necrosis, vessels, air, fat, and hemorrhage, the long diameter (LD), LD/short diameter (SD) ratio, and volume (LD × SD × height diameter)] were meticulously evaluated. In addition, the degree of enhancement during arterial and portal venous phases and the lesion-to-aorta CT attenuation ratio during both phases were quantified. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test, the Student's t-test, and the receiver operating characteristic curve to identify significant CT criteria. Sensitivity and specificity assessments were conducted for single and combined CT criteria.
resultsSignificant differentiators between eGISTs and IAF include non-mesenteric localization, irregular contour, well-defined borders, heterogeneous enhancement, presence of intralesional necrosis and vessels, and absence of intralesional fat, with LD exceeding 9.6 cm, an LD/SD ratio >1.22, and volume surpassing 603.3 cm
conclusionTen distinct CT criteria have been identified to distinguish eGISTs from IAF, notably encompassing non-mesenteric localization, irregular contour, well-defined borders, heterogeneous enhancement, presence of intralesional necrosis and vessels, absence of intralesional fat, LD >9.6 cm, an LD/SD ratio >1.22, and volume surpassing 603.3 cm CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The current findings establish CT criteria to distinguish eGISTs from IAF in a clinical setting.
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.