Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42889757›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026

Preoperative staging of gastric cancer: a prospective comparison of gastric filling ultrasonography and enhanced CT with implications for surgical decision-making.

Xinxin Qin, Junmei Zhao, Litao Ge, Song Wu, Xiaofeng Sun, Wei Li

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05596864 (Application Value of Transabdominal Gastric Contrast Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Staging Evaluation of Gastric Cancer), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05596864 unknown statusnot on this map

Application Value of Transabdominal Gastric Contrast Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Staging Evaluation of Gastric Cancer

TypeobservationalSponsorThe First Hospital of Jilin UniversityRan2022 to 2024Enrolled1,000ConditionsTransabdominal Gastric Contrast UltrasoundArmsgastric contrast ultrasound
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Xinxin QinDepartment of Gastrocolorectal Surgery, General Surgery Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Junmei ZhaoDepartment of Gastrocolorectal Surgery, General Surgery Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Litao GeDepartment of Gastrocolorectal Surgery, General Surgery Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Song WuDepartment of Gastrocolorectal Surgery, General Surgery Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Xiaofeng SunDepartment of Cadre's Wards Ultrasound Diagnostics, Ultrasound Diagnostic Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Wei LiDepartment of Gastrocolorectal Surgery, General Surgery Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Accurate preoperative staging is essential for optimizing treatment strategies in gastric cancer. While gastric-enhanced CT is widely used, its accuracy remains suboptimal, particularly for early-stage tumors. Gastric filling ultrasonography, a non-invasive technique using oral contrast to displace intraluminal gas, offers potential advantages in mural visualization. This prospective study compared the diagnostic performance of gastric filling ultrasonography and gastric-enhanced CT against postoperative pathological staging. Methods: We enrolled 406 patients with histologically confirmed gastric cancer who underwent both imaging modalities prior to surgery. Preoperative T and N stages assigned by each modality were compared with pathological results. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC curve (AUC) were calculated. McNemar's test was used for paired comparisons, DeLong test for AUC comparisons, and Kappa statistics for agreement assessment. Univariate logistic regression identified factors affecting ultrasound accuracy. Results: For T-staging, overall accuracy was 72.7% (295/406) for ultrasound vs. 63.5% (258/406) for CT ( Conclusions: Gastric filling ultrasonography demonstrates superior accuracy over gastric-enhanced CT for preoperative T1/T2 and N-staging, with substantial agreement with pathological findings. This non-invasive and radiation-free examination method can serve as an effective complement to CT, and is particularly suitable for gastric cancer at the T1 and T2 stages. We have proposed a complementary imaging protocol to assist in surgical decision-making, which is expected to enable clinicians to make more accurate preoperative staging assessments for patients with gastric cancer. Registration: It was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05596864).

Indexed as

clinical stagingenhanced computed tomographyfilling ultrasoundgastric cancerultrasound

Identifiers

PMID42889757
PMCPMC13670109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.