Cargando…

CT differentiation of gastric ectopic pancreas from gastric stromal tumor

BACKGROUND: Gastric ectopic pancreas (GEPs) is a rare developmental anomaly which is difficult to differentiate it from submucosal tumor such as gastric stromal tumor (GST) by imaging methods. Since the treatments of the GEPs and GST are totally different, a correct diagnosis is essential. Therefore...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Chang, Yang, Fang, Zhang, Wenming, Ao, Weiqun, An, Yongyu, Zhang, Cui, Dai, Bailing, Pu, Cailing, Wang, Jian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7860050/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33541287
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-021-01617-8
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Gastric ectopic pancreas (GEPs) is a rare developmental anomaly which is difficult to differentiate it from submucosal tumor such as gastric stromal tumor (GST) by imaging methods. Since the treatments of the GEPs and GST are totally different, a correct diagnosis is essential. Therefore, we retrospectively investigated the CT features of them to help us deepen the understanding of GEPs and GST. METHODS: This study enrolled 17 GEPs and 119 GST, which were proven pathologically. We assessed clinical and CT features to identify significant differential features of GEPs from GST using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, among all clinicoradiologic features, features of age, symptom, tumor marker, location, contour, peritumoral infiltration or fat-line of peritumor, necrosis, calcification, CT attenuation value of unenhancement phase/arterial phase/portal venous phase (CTu/CTa/CTp), the CT attenuation value of arterial phase/portal venous phase minus that of unenhanced phase (DEAP/DEPP), long diameter (LD), short diameter (SD) were considered statistically significant for the differentiation of them. And the multivariate analysis revealed that location, peritumoral infiltration or fat-line of peritumor, necrosis and DEPP were independent factors affecting the identification of them. In addition, ROC analysis showed that the test efficiency of CTp was perfect (AUC = 0.900). CONCLUSION: Location, the presence of peritumoral infiltration or fat-line of peritumor, necrosis and DEPP are useful CT differentiators of GEPs from GST. In addition, the test efficiency of CTp in differentiating them was perfect (AUC = 0.900).