ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Jejunal and ileal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: differences in clinicopathologic and computed tomography features.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo summarize and compare the clinicopathologic and computed tomography (CT) features of jejunal and ileal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs).
methodsA total of 108 patients with pathologically confirmed small bowel GISTs were retrospectively enrolled and categorized into jejunal and ileal groups according to anatomic sites. Two experienced radiologists independently reviewed CT images, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Clinicopathologic and CT features were compared between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors for differentiating jejunal and ileal GISTs, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate predictive performance.
resultsAmong 108 GISTs, 63 were jejunal and 45 were ileal. Ileal GISTs more frequently presented with abdominal discomfort, high-risk stratification, increased mitotic count, and larger tumor size (all adjusted p < 0.05), whereas jejunal GISTs were more prone to present with gastrointestinal bleeding (adjusted p = 0.014). Regarding CT features, jejunal GISTs tended to exhibit mixed growth pattern, ulceration, tumor vessels, early venous return, larger draining vein diameter, and higher attenuation in the arterial phase (AP) and portal venous phase (all adjusted p < 0.05). In contrast, ileal GISTs were more likely to show exophytic growth pattern and hemorrhage (all adjusted p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis identified tumor size (p = 0.031), diameter of draining vein (p = 0.023), and AP (p = 0.008) as independent predictors. ROC curve analysis showed that AP achieved the best predictive performance (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.912), followed by tumor size (AUC = 0.710) and diameter of draining vein (AUC = 0.640).
conclusionJejunal GISTs exhibit distinct clinicopathologic and CT features compared with ileal GISTs. These findings may aid in clinical differentiation and potentially improve diagnostic accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42095899What 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.