ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
Evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic CT transmural sign for T staging of gastric cancer compared to conventional CT criteria.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundTo retrospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of pre-procedural multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) using dynamic CT transmural (CTTM) criteria for T staging of gastric cancer.
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled 116 patients who underwent three-phase dynamic MDCT and subsequently received endoscopic treatment or surgery. The positive CTTM sign was defined as a new diagnostic criterion for this study. Two radiologists independently reviewed the CT images, categorizing patients into five groups: T1b sm1, T1b sm2/3, T2, T3, and T4. The diagnostic performance of the new criterion was assessed against pathological results as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values for each T stage were compared to those of conventional CT.
resultsDynamic CTTM criteria demonstrated higher overall diagnostic accuracy (Reviewer 1: 88.9%, Reviewer 2: 91.4%) for T staging compared to conventional CT criteria (75.9%). Reviewer 1 accurately staged T1b in 85.3% of patients, T2 in 87.7%, T3 in 94.1%, and T4 in 98.3%. Reviewer 2 achieved T1b accuracy of 87.9%, T2 of 89.2%, T3 of 94.9%, and T4 of 98.3%. The dynamic CTTM criteria effectively subdivided T1b into T1b sm1 (87.2% and 88.1%) and T1b sm2/3 (84.6% and 86.2%). Dynamic CTTM criteria exhibited higher under-staging rates, while conventional criteria showed higher over-staging rates.
conclusionsDynamic CTTM criteria demonstrated superior accuracy in T staging of gastric cancer and reasonable effectiveness in subdividing T1b stages into T1b sm1 and T1b sm2/3.
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.