Type-Specific Diagnosis and Evaluation of Longitudinal Tumor Extent of Borrmann Type IV Gastric Cancer: CT versus Gastroscopy

Abstract

Objective

To compare the accuracy of computed tomography (CT) with that of gastroscopy for the extent of evaluation of longitudinal tumor and type-specific diagnosis of Borrmann type IV gastric cancer.

Materials and Methods

Fifty-nine patients (35 men with mean age of 60 years and 24 women with mean age of 55 years) who underwent surgical resection of Borrmann type IV gastric cancer were included in this study. Histopathological analysis data was used as a reference standard to confirm the clinical interpretations of gastroscopy and CT for the diagnosis of Borrmann type IV and evaluation of longitudinal tumor extent. For the evaluation of longitudinal extent, gastroscopic and CT results were classified as underestimated, accurate, or overestimated. The McNemar test was used to identify statistically significant differences in the accuracy between gastroscopy and CT.

Results

For the diagnosis of Borrmann type IV gastric cancer, the accuracy of CT was significantly higher than that of gastroscopy (74.6% [44/59] vs. 44.1% [26/59], p < 0.001). CT was significantly more accurate in assessing the overall tumor extent than gastroscopy (61.4% [35/57] vs. 28.1% [16/57], p < 0.001). The proximal (75.4% [43/57] vs. 50.9% [29/57], p = 0.003) and distal tumor extent (71.9% [41/57] vs. 43.9% [25/57], p < 0.05) were more accurately predicted by CT compared with gastroscopy. The underestimation of tumor extent was a major source of error in both examinations.

Conclusion

CT was found to be more predictive than gastroscopy in type-specific diagnosis and the evaluation of longitudinal tumor extent in patients with Borrmann type IV gastric cancer.