Moon Won Lee1, Gwang Ha Kim2, Kwang Baek Kim3, Yoon Ho Kim1, Do Youn Park4, Chang In Choi5, Dae Hwan Kim5, Tae Yong Jeon5. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, 179 Gudeok-ro, Seo-Gu, Busan, 49241, South Korea. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, 179 Gudeok-ro, Seo-Gu, Busan, 49241, South Korea. doc0224@pusan.ac.kr. 3. Division of Computer Engineering, Silla University, Busan, South Korea. 4. Department of Pathology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea. 5. Department of Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: When gastric mesenchymal tumors (GMTs) measuring 2-5 cm in size are found, whether to undergo further treatment or not is controversial. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is useful for the evaluation of malignant potential of GMTs, but has limitations, such as subjective interpretation of EUS images. Therefore, we aimed to develop a scoring system based on the digital image analysis of EUS images to predict gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). METHODS: We included 103 patients with histopathologically proven GIST, leiomyoma or schwannoma on surgically resected specimen who underwent EUS examination between January 2007 and June 2018. After standardization of the EUS images, brightness values, including the mean (Tmean), indicative of echogenicity, and the standard deviation (TSD), indicative of heterogeneity, in the tumors were analyzed. RESULTS: Age, Tmean, and TSD were significantly higher in GISTs than in non-GISTs. The sensitivity and specificity were almost optimized for differentiating GISTs from non-GISTs when the critical values of age, Tmean, and TSD were 57.5 years, 67.0, and 25.6, respectively. A GIST-predicting scoring system was created by assigning 3 points for Tmean ≥ 67, 2 points for age ≥ 58 years, and 1 point for TSD ≥ 26. When GMTs with 3 points or more were diagnosed as GISTs, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the scoring system were 86.5%, 75.9%, and 83.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The scoring system based on the information of digital image analysis is useful in predicting GISTs in case of GMTs that are 2-5 cm in size.
BACKGROUND: When gastric mesenchymal tumors (GMTs) measuring 2-5 cm in size are found, whether to undergo further treatment or not is controversial. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is useful for the evaluation of malignant potential of GMTs, but has limitations, such as subjective interpretation of EUS images. Therefore, we aimed to develop a scoring system based on the digital image analysis of EUS images to predict gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). METHODS: We included 103 patients with histopathologically proven GIST, leiomyoma or schwannoma on surgically resected specimen who underwent EUS examination between January 2007 and June 2018. After standardization of the EUS images, brightness values, including the mean (Tmean), indicative of echogenicity, and the standard deviation (TSD), indicative of heterogeneity, in the tumors were analyzed. RESULTS: Age, Tmean, and TSD were significantly higher in GISTs than in non-GISTs. The sensitivity and specificity were almost optimized for differentiating GISTs from non-GISTs when the critical values of age, Tmean, and TSD were 57.5 years, 67.0, and 25.6, respectively. A GIST-predicting scoring system was created by assigning 3 points for Tmean ≥ 67, 2 points for age ≥ 58 years, and 1 point for TSD ≥ 26. When GMTs with 3 points or more were diagnosed as GISTs, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the scoring system were 86.5%, 75.9%, and 83.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The scoring system based on the information of digital image analysis is useful in predicting GISTs in case of GMTs that are 2-5 cm in size.
Authors: F Gress; C Schmitt; T Savides; D O Faigel; M Catalano; W Wassef; L Roubein; N Nickl; D Ciaccia; M Bhutani; B Hoffman; J Affronti Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: A Chak; M I Canto; T Rösch; H J Dittler; R H Hawes; T L Tio; C J Lightdale; H W Boyce; J Scheiman; S L Carpenter; J Van Dam; M L Kochman; M V Sivak Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1997-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: M F Catalano; M V Sivak; R A Bedford; G W Falk; R van Stolk; F Presa; J Van Dam Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1995-02 Impact factor: 9.427