Development of a CT image analysis-based scoring system to differentiate gastric schwannomas from gastrointestinal stromal tumors

Preoperative differentiation of gastric schwannomas and gastrointestinal stromal tumors based on computed tomography: a retrospective multicenter observational study

Introduction

Gastric schwannoma is a rare benign tumor accounting for only 1-2% of alimentary tract mesenchymal tumors. Owing to their low incidence rate, most cases are misdiagnosed as gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), especially tumors with a diameter of less than 5 cm. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate a diagnostic nomogram based on computed tomography (CT) imaging features for the preoperative prediction of gastric schwannomas and GISTs (diameters = 2-5 cm).

Methods

Gastric schwannomas in 47 patients and GISTs in 230 patients were confirmed by surgical pathology. Thirty-four patients with gastric schwannomas and 167 with GISTs admitted between June 2009 and August 2022 at Hospital 1 were retrospectively analyzed as the test and training sets, respectively. Seventy-six patients (13 with gastric schwannomas and 63 with GISTs) were included in the external validation set (June 2017 to September 2022 at Hospital 2). The independent factors for differentiating gastric schwannomas from GISTs were obtained by multivariate logistic regression analysis, and a corresponding nomogram model was established. The accuracy of the nomogram was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic and calibration curves.

Results

Logistic regression analysis showed that the growth pattern (odds ratio [OR] 3.626; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.105-11.900), absence of necrosis (OR 4.752; 95% CI 1.464-15.424), presence of tumor-associated lymph nodes (OR 23.978; 95% CI 6.499-88.466), the difference between CT values during the portal and arterial phases (OR 1.117; 95% CI 1.042-1.198), and the difference between CT values during the delayed and portal phases (OR 1.159; 95% CI 1.080-1.245) were independent factors in differentiating gastric schwannoma from GIST. The resulting individualized prediction nomogram showed good discrimination in the training (area under the curve [AUC], 0.937; 95% CI, 0.900-0.973) and validation (AUC, 0.921; 95% CI, 0.830-1.000) datasets. The calibration curve showed that the probability of gastric schwannomas predicted using the nomogram agreed well with the actual value.

Conclusion

The proposed nomogram model based on CT imaging features can be used to differentiate gastric schwannoma from GIST before surgery.

Differentiating gastric schwannoma from gastric stromal tumor (≤5 cm) by histogram analysis based on iodine-based material decomposition images: a preliminary study

Objective

This study aims to investigate the value of histogram analysis based on iodine-based material decomposition (IMD) images obtained through dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) to differentiate gastric schwannoma (GS) from gastric stromal tumor (GST) (≤5 cm) preoperatively.

Methods

From January 2015 to January 2023, 15 patients with GS and 30 patients with GST (≤5 cm) who underwent biphasic contrast-enhanced scans using DECT were enrolled in this study. For each tumor, we reconstructed IMD images at the arterial phase (AP) and venous phase (VP). Nine histogram parameters were automatically extracted and selected using MaZda software based on the IMD of AP and VP, respectively, including mean, 1st, 10th, 50th, 90th, and 99th percentile of the iodine concentration value (Perc.01, Perc.10, Perc.50, Perc.90, and Perc.99), variance, skewness, and kurtosis. The extracted IMD histogram parameters were compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test. The optimal IMD histogram parameters were selected using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

Results

Among the IMD histogram parameters of AP, the mean, Perc.50, Perc.90, Perc.99, variance, and skewness of the GS group were lower than that of the GST group (all P < 0.05). Among the IMD histogram parameters of VP, Perc.90, Perc.99, and the variance of the GS group was lower than those of the GST group (all P < 0.05). The ROC analysis showed that Perc.99 (AP) generated the best diagnostic performance with the area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity being 0.960, 86.67%, and 93.33%, respectively, when using 71.00 as the optimal threshold.

Conclusion

Histogram analysis based on IMD images obtained through DECT holds promise as a valuable tool for the preoperative distinction between GS and GST (≤5 cm).