ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
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.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The preoperative diagnosis of gastric stromal tumor (GST) and gastric schwannoma (GS) is of great significance for the selection of surgical methods. However, their similar clinical and imaging findings make it challenging to distinguish between the two tumors, and thus misdiagnosis occurs frequently before surgery. This study aimed to investigate the value of clinical data and enhanced computed tomography (CT) features in the differential diagnosis of GST and GS by a multi-institution retrospective analysis, for large (≥5 cm) and small (<5 cm) tumors. Methods: This study involved 493 patients with GST and 102 patients with GS. The enhanced CT imaging data and clinical characteristics of the participants were analyzed, including the complete clinical and imaging data, and postoperative pathological diagnosis. The cut-off value of 5 cm of the tumor was used to divide the patients into two groups (large group: 164 GST and 13 GS; small group: 329 GST and 89 GS). The categorical variables were statistically analyzed using the chi-squared test, and the continuous variables were statistically analyzed using independent samples Results: A total of 177 patients were divided into a large GST (GST-L) group (n=164) and a large GS (GS-L) group (n=13), and 418 patients were divided into a small GST (GST-S) group (n=329) and a small GS (GS-S) group (n=89). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the lymph node and necrosis were independent risk factors in large groups. In the small groups, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that sex, location, growth pattern, lymph node, and necrosis were independent risk factors. The area under the curve was 0.983 in the large groups [accuracy (ACC) =95.5, sensitivity (SEN) =0.923, specificity (SPE) =0.957], and 0.931 in the small groups (ACC =77.8, SEN =0.816, SPE =0.922). Conclusions: The two models have high diagnostic efficiency, and share significantly different features of lymph nodes and necrosis, whether in large or small groups, which may contribute to providing a precise reference for the planning of surgical methods.
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.