Diagnosis Of Gastric Stromal Tumors Research Articles

Comparing endoscopic ultrasonography and double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the preoperative diagnosis of gastric stromal tumor

BackgroundThis study was designed to perform a comparative analysis between endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCEUS) for the preoperative diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors (GSTs).MethodsA retrospective study was conducted involving 139 patients with histologically confirmed GSTs. All patients preoperatively underwent DCEUS and EUS. The pathology reports were treated as the baseline and were retrospectively compared with the findings of EUS and DCEUS.ResultsOf the 139 lesions, 120 and 113 were correctly identified by DCEUS and EUS, respectively, with an accuracy of 86.3% and 81.3%. The results revealed an insignificant difference between these two methods (p = 0.189).ConclusionsDCEUS can display not only the locations, sizes, shapes, borders, internal echoes, but also show the blood perfusion patterns of GSTs. It is a highly accurate, noninvasive, and convenient method to be used at the pre-treatment stage.

The value of color Doppler ultrasonography combined with serum tumor markers in differential diagnosis of gastric stromal tumor and gastric cancer.

This study aimed to explore the value of color Doppler ultrasonography combined with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) in differential diagnosis of gastric stromal tumor (GST) and gastric cancer (GC). An analysis of the clinical data of 180 patients with clinically suspected gastric space occupying lesions. According to the postoperative pathological results, 180 suspected gastric space-occupying lesion patients were divided into GST group (n = 83) and GC group (n = 97). Color Doppler ultrasonography, serum tumor markers CEA and CA19-9 were compared. The research results showed that serum CEA and CA19-9 levels were lower in patients with GST group than those with GC group (both P < 0.001). With postoperative pathology as the gold standard, detection rates of GST and GC by combination of color Doppler ultrasound (CDUS), serum CEA, and CA19-9 were higher than those of each index alone (both P < 0.001). There was no difference between detection rates of GST and GC by combination of CDUS, serum CEA, and CA19-9 (P = 0.058). Color Doppler ultrasonography combined with serum tumor markers CEA and CA19-9 tests has a certain differential diagnostic value for GST and GC, which may provide a reliable reference basis for clinical diagnosis and treatment.

Multi-slice spiral computed tomography in differential diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors and benign gastric polyps, and gastric stromal tumor risk stratification assessment.

BACKGROUNDThe biological characteristics of gastric stromal tumors are complex, and their incidence has increased in recent years. Gastric stromal tumors (GST) have potential malignant tendencies, and the probability of transformation into malignant tumors is as high as 20%-30%.AIMTo investigate the value of multi-slice spiral computed tomography (MSCT) in the differential diagnosis of GST and benign gastric polyps, and GST risk stratification assessment.METHODSWe included 64 patients with GST (GST group) and 60 with benign gastric polyps (control group), confirmed by pathological examination after surgery in PLA General Hospital, from January 2016 to June 2021. The differences in the MSCT imaging characteristic parameters and enhanced CT values between the two groups before surgery were compared. According to the National Institutes of Health’s standard, GST is divided into low- and high-risk groups for MSCT imaging characteristic parameters and enhanced CT values.RESULTSThe incidences of extraluminal growth, blurred boundaries, and ulceration in the GST group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The CT values and enhanced peak CT values in the arterial phase in the CST group were higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The MSCT differential diagnosis of GST and gastric polyp sensitivity, specificity, misdiagnosis rate, missed diagnosis rate, and areas under the curve (AUCs) were 73.44 %, 83.33%, 26.56%, 16.67%, 0.784, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted with the arterial CT value and enhanced peak CT value, with a statistical difference. The results showed that the sensitivity, specificity, misdiagnosis rate, missed diagnosis rate, and AUC value of arterial CT in the differential diagnosis of GST and gastric polyps were 80.18%, 62.20%, 19.82%, 37.80%, and 0.710, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, misdiagnosis rate, missed diagnosis rate, and AUC value of the enhanced peak CT value in the differential diagnosis of GST and gastric polyps were 67.63%, 60.40%, 32.37%, 39.60%, and 0.710, respectively. The incidence of blurred lesion boundaries and ulceration in the high-risk group was significantly higher than that in the low-risk group (P < 0.05). The arterial phase and enhanced peak CT values in the high-risk group were significantly higher than those in the low-risk group (P < 0.05).CONCLUSIONPresurgical MSCT examination has important value in the differential diagnosis of GST and gastric benign polyps and can effectively evaluate the risk grade of GST patients.

Clinical Value of Color Doppler Ultrasound in Differential Diagnosis of Gastric Stromal Tumor

Clinical Value of Color Doppler Ultrasound in Differential Diagnosis of Gastric Stromal Tumor

The diagnostic value of serum CEA and CA19-9 in gastric stromal tumors

Objective To evaluate the diagnostic value of CEA, CA19-9, CA72-4, AFP, and CA125 in gastric stromal tumors. Methods 41 patients with gastric stromal tumors and 11 patients with gastric leiomyoma were recruited in this study from Qilu Hospital of Shandong University during May 2014 to December 2017. The tissue was collected by surgery, and HE staining was done. Immunohistochemistry was employed to detect the expression of CD34, CD117, and DOG-1. Serum of all cases and 41 healthy volunteers in the same hospital were collected. The levels of CEA, CA19-9, CA72-4, AFP and CA125 were examined by electrochemiluminescence assay, and the differences in each group were compared by M-W test or K-W test. Then the relationship between those biomarkers and the clinical parameters of gastric stromal tumors was analyzed. Moreover, AUC (Area Under the curve), cut-off value, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value with drawing ROC curve (receiver operating characteristic curve) were also calculated. Results Spindle cells or epithelioid cells were observed in the tissue of gastric stromal tumors. The expression of CD34, CD117, DOG-1 were positive. The level of the serum CEA 1.53 (1.15, 2.22) ng/ml in patients with gastric stromal tumor patients was higher than that in healthy controls 1.06 (0.62, 1.48) ng/ml and that in patients with gastric leiomyoma 0.79 (0.39, 1.39) ng/ml (the U value was 446.5, and 113.0 respectively, P 0.05). Furthermore, the level of CEA was closely related to TNM stage (the U value was 129.0, P 0.05). However, the combination of two markers might increase diagnostic efficiency. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and AUC was 92.7%, 48.8%, 64.4%, 87.0% and 0.752 respectively. Conclusion The combination of CEA and CA19-9 has better sensitivity and negative predictive value in auxiliary diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors. Key words: Stomach neoplasms; Gastrointestinal stromal tumors; Carcinoembryonic antigen; CA-19-9 antigen

Diagnosis and treatment of gastric stromal tumors

In recent years, with the detection rate of gastrointestinal cancer increasing, gastric stromal tumor attracted widespread attention. The diagnosis of gastric stromal tumor still depends on Endoscopy and Medical Imaging. Upon treatment level it not only emphasize the importance of surgery, but also highlights the molecular targeted drugs′ efficacy. Gastric stromal tumor diagnostic techniques has been updated upon traditional examination, and molecular targeted drug clinical really works to some extent, but the drug resistance and the second, the third line targeted drug therapy is still lacking lots of evidence-based medical evidence. This article will review the current treatment and treatment of gastric stromal tumor. Key words: Gastric stromal tumors; Diagnosis; Molecular targeted therapy; Imatinib; Review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and trucut biopsy in the diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors: a randomized crossover study

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) has important prognostic and therapeutic implications. The specific diagnosis of GIST has to be based on immunocytochemistry. This study aimed to prospectively compare in a crossover manner the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) in the specific diagnosis of gastric GISTs. We hypothesized that EUS-TCB is superior to EUS-FNA in this respect. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with gastric subepithelial tumors suspected on the basis of EUS of being a GIST underwent both EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB. The sequence in which the techniques were employed was randomly assigned to avoid bias. RESULTS: Forty tumors were sampled (mean number of passes: 2.1 ± 0.9 with EUS-TNB and 1.9 ± 0.8 with EUS-FNA; P = not significant, NS). Final diagnoses were: GIST (n = 27), carcinoma (n = 2), leiomyoma (n = 1), schwannoma (n = 1), and no diagnosis possible (n = 9). Device failure occurred in 6 patients with EUS-TCB. A cytohistological diagnosis of mesenchymal tumor (n = 29) and carcinoma (n = 2) was made in 70 % of cases by EUS-FNA and in 60 % of cases by EUS-TCB ( P = NS). Among the samples that were adequate, immunohistochemistry could be performed in 74 % of EUS-FNA samples and in 91 % of EUS-TCB samples ( P = 0.025). When inadequate samples were included, the overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA was 52 % and that of EUS-TCB was 55 % ( P = NS). There were no complications. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-TCB is not superior to EUS-FNA in GISTs because of the high rate of technical failure of trucut. However, when an adequate sample is obtained with EUS-TCB, immunohistochemical phenotyping is almost always possible. EUS-TCB can be safely performed in this set of patients.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and trucut biopsy in the diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors: a randomized crossover study

The diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) has important prognostic and therapeutic implications. The specific diagnosis of GIST has to be based on immunocytochemistry. This study aimed to prospectively compare in a crossover manner the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) in the specific diagnosis of gastric GISTs. We hypothesized that EUS-TCB is superior to EUS-FNA in this respect. Forty patients with gastric subepithelial tumors suspected on the basis of EUS of being a GIST underwent both EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB. The sequence in which the techniques were employed was randomly assigned to avoid bias. Forty tumors were sampled (mean number of passes: 2.1 +/- 0.9 with EUS-TNB and 1.9 +/- 0.8 with EUS-FNA; P = not significant, NS). Final diagnoses were: GIST (n = 27), carcinoma (n = 2), leiomyoma (n = 1), schwannoma (n = 1), and no diagnosis possible (n = 9). Device failure occurred in 6 patients with EUS-TCB. A cytohistological diagnosis of mesenchymal tumor (n = 29) and carcinoma (n = 2) was made in 70 % of cases by EUS-FNA and in 60 % of cases by EUS-TCB ( P = NS). Among the samples that were adequate, immunohistochemistry could be performed in 74 % of EUS-FNA samples and in 91 % of EUS-TCB samples ( P = 0.025). When inadequate samples were included, the overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA was 52 % and that of EUS-TCB was 55 % ( P = NS). There were no complications. EUS-TCB is not superior to EUS-FNA in GISTs because of the high rate of technical failure of trucut. However, when an adequate sample is obtained with EUS-TCB, immunohistochemical phenotyping is almost always possible. EUS-TCB can be safely performed in this set of patients.

La pseudotumeur fibreuse calcifiante gastrique, une tumeur rare de l’estomac

We report a case of calcifying fibrous pseudotumor fortuitously discovered on abdominal CT-scan in a 50 year-old woman presenting with metrorragia. CT-scan showed a 2 cm hypodense nodular tumor of the gastric wall with granular calcifications. Upper endoscopy showed a nodular tumor along the lesser curvature of the gastric body, covered by normal gastric mucosa and biopsies were negative. A diagnosis of gastric stromal tumor was suspected and a partial gastrectomy was performed. On gross examination surgical specimen showed a firm, whitish nodular tumor measuring 2 cm in diameter. On microscopic examination the tumor was composed of whorls of dense hyalinized collagen bundles with a few fibroblasts. There were psammomatous calcifications and nodular aggregates of mononuclear inflammatory cells. Immunohistochemically, spindle cells stained for vimentin. They did not stain for smooth muscle actin, desmin, CD34, CD117, S100 protein, Ki-67 and ALK-1. Surgical resection of the tumor was complete. Patient has no evidence of disease with a follow-up of 12 months. Only seven cases of gastric calcifiying fibrous pseudotumors have been reported in the literature. These benign tumors are usually incidentally discovered. They have characteristic imaging and microscopic features and appear as a distinct clinicopathologic entity different from stromal tumors.

Laparoscopic resection of gastric stromal tumors: report of 30 cases

To investigate the treatment efficacy of laparoscopic resection of gastric stromal tumors. The clinical data of 30 patients with laparoscopic resection of gastric stromal tumors from Apr. 2004 to Apr. 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. The preoperative diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors mainly relied on gastroscope, ultrasound gastroscope, barium meal and abdominal CT scan. Tumor size ranged from 2 to 10 cm. Surgical procedures included laparoscopic wedge resection for 22 patients, laparoscopic distal gastrectomies for 6 patients, and laparoscopic proximal gastrectomies for 2 patients. All operations were successful, with an average operation time of 120+/-35 min and a blood loss of 5-200 ml. Postoperative length of stay was 4-10 days. No recurrence had occurred during 3-24 months follow-up. Laparoscopic resection of gastric stromal tumors is a safe and reliable procedure, with quick postoperative recovery and minimal invasion.

Gastric Stromal Tumor: Two-Phase Dynamic CT Findings with Water as Oral Contrast Agents

Purpose: To evaluate two-phase dynamic CT with water as oral contrast agents in the CT diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the CT findings in 21 patients with pathologically proven gastric stromal tumors. Six were found to be benign, twelve were malignant, and there were three cases of STUMP (stromal tumor uncertain malignant potential). Two-phase dynamic CT scans with water as oral contrast agents were obtained 60-70secs (portal phase) and 3 mins (equilibrium phase) after the start of IV contrast administration. We determined the size, growth pattern, and enhancement pattern of the tumors and overlying mucosa, the presence or absence of ulceration and necrosis, tumor extent, and lymph node and distant metastasis. The CT and pathologic findings were correlated. Results: All six benign tumors and three STUMP were less than 5.5 cm in size, and during the portal phase showed round endogastric masses with highly enhanced, intact overlying mucosa. Twelve malignant tumors were 4.5-15.5 cm in size (mean, 11.5cm); an endogastric mass was seen in three cases, an exogastric mass in one, and a mixed pattern in eight. On portal phase images the tumors were not significantly enhanced, but highly enhanced feeding vessels were noted in five larger tumors ( 10cm). All 12 malignant tumors showed ulceration and necrosis, and interruption of overlying mucosa was clearly seen during the portal phase. We were readily able to evaluate tumor extent during this phase, and in ten malignant tumors there was no invasion of adjacent organs. Seven malignant tumors showed air density within their necrotic portion (p0.05). On equilibrium phase images, all malignant tumors showed heterogeneous enhancement due to necrosis, and poorly enhanced overlying mucosa. Conclusion: Dynamic CT during the portal phase with water as oral contrast agents was useful for depicting the submucosal origin of gastric stromal tumors and for evaluating the extent of malignant stromal tumors. Our results suggest that these CT findings may be helpful for differentiating between benign and malignant stromal tumors, and in distinguishing them from other gastric tumors.