Difference in Perfusion Parameters Between Gastric Cancer and Gastric Stromal Tumors: Evaluation With Oral Contrast Plus Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography

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

BACKGROUND

This 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).

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

Of 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).

CONCLUSIONS

DCEUS 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.

Adoption of Two-Dimensional Ultrasound Gastrointestinal Filling Contrast on Artificial Intelligence Algorithm in Clinical Diagnosis of Gastric Cancer

This research was aimed to explore the value of gastrointestinal filling contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and computed tomography (CT-)-enhanced scanning based on artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm in the evaluation of gastric cancer staging. 102 patients with gastric cancer were selected as the research objects. All of them underwent CEUS of gastrointestinal filling and 64-slice spiral CT before surgery. In addition, an improved mean shift algorithm was proposed based on differential optical flow and deep convolutional neural network (D-CNN), which was applied in image processing. The predicted positive rate (PPR), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of gastric cancer in different stages by CEUS and CT were calculated using pathological diagnosis results as the gold standard. 17 patients with T1 stage, 41 patients with T2-T3 stage, and 35 patients with T4 stage were detected by CEUS. 13 patients with T1 stage, 34 patients with T2-T3 stage, and 30 patients with T4 stage were detected by CT enhanced examination. The PPRs of CEUS for T1, T2-T3, and T4 stages of gastric cancer were higher than those of CT enhanced (P < 0.05). The PPR of CEUS for N0 staging of gastric cancer was higher than that of CT enhanced (P < 0.05), and it for N3 staging of gastric cancer was lower than that of CT enhanced (P < 0.05). From the analysis of M staging of gastric cancer, the PPRs of CEUS for M0 and M1 staging of gastric cancer were not statistically different from the PPRs of CT enhanced (P > 0.05). The sensitivity (95.6%), specificity (81.82%), and accuracy (94.12%) of CEUS in assessing resectability were significantly higher than those of CT enhancement (89.01%, 63.67%, and 86.27%, respectively), and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). In summary, CEUS gastrointestinal filling based on the D-CNN algorithm could better improve the display rate of the tissue lesions around the stomach. It also helped to judge the lesion progress, the depth of infiltration, and lymph node metastasis of the lesion. In addition, it had excellent performance in evaluating the resectability of gastric cancer before surgery and had clinical promotion value.