Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Sep 21, 2017; 23(35): 6448-6456
Published online Sep 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i35.6448
Published online Sep 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i35.6448
Table 1 Patient characteristics n (%)
Characteristics | Recurrence group (n = 60) | Control group (n = 60) | ||
P value | ||||
Age (yr) | Median | 60.6 | 65 | 0.755 |
Range | 29-80 | 35-85 | ||
Sex | Male | 37 (62) | 16 (27) | 0.172 |
Female | 23 (38) | 44 (73) | ||
Operation | Total gastrectomy | 17 (28) | 12 (20) | 0.286 |
Subtotal gastrectomy | 43 (72) | 48 (80) | ||
AJCC stage | IA | 0 (0) | 33 (55) | < 0.001 |
IB | 5 (8) | 10 (17) | ||
IIA | 7 (12) | 9 (15) | ||
IIB | 9 (15) | 3 (5) | ||
IIIA | 7 (12) | 1 (2) | ||
IIIB | 10 (16) | 2 (3) | ||
IIIC | 15 (25) | 2 (3) | ||
IV | 7 (12) | 0 (0) | ||
Pathology | Adenocarcinoma | 51 (85) | 55 (92) | 0.454 |
Signet ring cell carcinoma | 5 (8) | 2 (3) | ||
Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 4 (7) | 3 (5) | ||
Interval between CT and PET/CT (d) | Median | 5.9 | 2.8 | < 0.001 |
Range | 0-28 | 0-9 |
Table 2 Locations of recurrent lesions
Location | Number of lesions n (%) |
Locoregional recurrence | 10 (13) |
Lymph node recurrence | 24 (30) |
Liver metastasis | 3 (4) |
Peritoneal carcinomatosis | 24 (30) |
Other recurrence1 | 18 (23) |
Total | 79 (100) |
Table 3 Comparison of contrast-enhanced computed tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the detection of recurrence
Site | Imaging | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Positive predictive value (%) | Negative predictive value (%) | Accuracy (%) | P value |
Overall | CT | 97 (58/60) | 97 (58/60) | 97 (58/60) | 97 (58/60) | 97 (114/120) | 0.096 |
PET/CT | 82 (49/60) | 95 (57/60) | 94 (49/52) | 84 (57/68) | 88 (106/120) | ||
Locoregional | CT | 80 (8/10) | 100 (110/110) | 100 (8/8) | 98 (112/110) | 98 (118/120) | 1.000 |
PET/CT | 80 (8/10) | 99 (109/110) | 89 (8/9) | 98 (109/111) | 98 (117/120) | ||
Lymph node | CT | 92 (22/24) | 99 (95/96) | 96 (22/23) | 98 (95/97) | 98 (117/120) | 1.000 |
PET/CT | 88 (21/24) | 99 (95/96) | 95 (21/22) | 97 (95/98) | 97 (116/120) | ||
Liver | CT | 67 (2/3) | 96 (112/117) | 29 (2/7) | 99 (112/113) | 95 (114/120) | 0.688 |
PET/CT | 100 (3/3) | 98 (115/117) | 60 (3/5) | 100 (115/115) | 98 (118/120) | ||
Peritoneal carcinomatosis | CT | 96 (23/24) | 100 (96/96) | 100 (23/23) | 99 (96/97) | 99 (119/120) | 0.001 |
PET/CT | 50 (12/24) | 100 (96/96) | 100 (12/12) | 89 (96/108) | 90 (108/120) | ||
Total lesion | CT | 86 (68/79) | 98 (511/521) | 87 (68/78) | 98 (511/522) | 97 (579/600) | 0.089 |
PET/CT | 76 (60/79) | 98 (513/521) | 88 (60/68) | 96 (513/532) | 96 (573/600) |
Table 4 Comparison of contrast-enhanced computed tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the detection of recurrence according to pathological type
Type | Imaging | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Positive predictive value (%) | Negative predictive value (%) | Accuracy (%) | P value |
Overall | CT | 97 (58/60) | 97 (58/60) | 97 (58/60) | 97 (58/60) | 97 (114/120) | 0.096 |
PET/CT | 82 (49/60) | 95 (57/60) | 94 (49/52) | 84 (57/68) | 88 (106/120) | ||
Adenocarcinoma | CT | 98 (50/51) | 95 (52/55) | 94 (50/53) | 98 (52/53) | 96 (102/106) | 0.035 |
PET/CT | 80 (41/51) | 95 (52/55) | 93 (41/44) | 84 (52/62) | 88 (93/106) | ||
Signet ring cell carcinoma | CT | 100 (5/5) | 100 (2/2) | 100 (5/5) | 100 (2/2) | 100 (7/7) | 1 |
PET/CT | 80 (4/5) | 100 (2/2) | 100 (4/4) | 67 (2/3) | 86 (6/7) | ||
Mucinous adenocarcinoma | CT | 75 (3/4) | 100 (3/3) | 100 (3/3) | 75 (3/4) | 86 (6/7) | 1 |
PET/CT | 100 (4/4) | 100 (3/3) | 100 (4/4) | 100 (3/3) | 100 (7/7) |
- Citation: Kim JH, Heo SH, Kim JW, Shin SS, Min JJ, Kwon SY, Jeong YY, Kang HK. Evaluation of recurrence in gastric carcinoma: Comparison of contrast-enhanced computed tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23(35): 6448-6456
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v23/i35/6448.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i35.6448