OBJECTIVE: To compare the CT findings of adenocarcinoma and malignant lymphoma of the stomach. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The authors retrospectively reviewed the computed tomographic images of 21 patients who received a definite pathologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma or malignant lymphoma of the stomach. The images were taken at Srinagarind Hospital between January 2006 and February 2009. Seventeen patients with gastric adenocarcinoma and four with malignant gastric lymphoma were included in the present study. The pattern of involvement, the location of lesion, the perigastric fat plane, the perigastric lymphadenopathy and the extension of disease on CT images were evaluated and analyzed by Chi-square and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between gastric adenocarcinoma and malignant gastric lymphoma in the pattern of involvement of disease (p = 0.010), the perigastric fat plane (p = 0.002) and the location of disease (p = 0.008). By contrast, there was no respective statistically significant difference in the perigastric lymphadenopathy (p = 0.950) and the extension of disease (p = 0.175) in between gastric adenocarcinoma and malignant gastric lymphoma. CONCLUSION: The CT findings helpful for differentiating gastric adenocarcinoma from malignant gastric lymphoma are the pattern of involvement, the perigastric fat plane, and the location of lesion. Localized involvement of the lesion, abnormal perigastric fat plane and location involving one region of the stomach tend to indicate gastric adenocarcinoma; while diffused involvement of the lesion, preserved perigastric fat plane and location involving more than one region of the stomach tend to indicate malignant gastric lymphoma.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the CT findings of adenocarcinoma and malignant lymphoma of the stomach. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The authors retrospectively reviewed the computed tomographic images of 21 patients who received a definite pathologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma or malignant lymphoma of the stomach. The images were taken at Srinagarind Hospital between January 2006 and February 2009. Seventeen patients with gastric adenocarcinoma and four with malignant gastric lymphoma were included in the present study. The pattern of involvement, the location of lesion, the perigastric fat plane, the perigastric lymphadenopathy and the extension of disease on CT images were evaluated and analyzed by Chi-square and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between gastric adenocarcinoma and malignant gastric lymphoma in the pattern of involvement of disease (p = 0.010), the perigastric fat plane (p = 0.002) and the location of disease (p = 0.008). By contrast, there was no respective statistically significant difference in the perigastric lymphadenopathy (p = 0.950) and the extension of disease (p = 0.175) in between gastric adenocarcinoma and malignant gastric lymphoma. CONCLUSION: The CT findings helpful for differentiating gastric adenocarcinoma from malignant gastric lymphoma are the pattern of involvement, the perigastric fat plane, and the location of lesion. Localized involvement of the lesion, abnormal perigastric fat plane and location involving one region of the stomach tend to indicate gastric adenocarcinoma; while diffused involvement of the lesion, preserved perigastric fat plane and location involving more than one region of the stomach tend to indicate malignant gastric lymphoma.