BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Jan 15, 2026; 18(1): 113662
Published online Jan 15, 2026. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v18.i1.113662
Table 1 Number of detected cases of gastric cancer by different methods
Methods
Pathological examination
Total
Sensitivity, %
Specificity, %
Accuracy, %
Positive predictive value, %
Negative predictive value, %
Positive
Negative
Endoscopic ultrasound positive5986786.76 (59/68)76.47 (26/34)83.33 (85/102)88.06 (59/67)74.29 (26/35)
Negative92635
Total6834102
MDCT positive57106783.82 (57/68)70.59 (24/34)77.45 (79/102)85.07 (57/67)68.57 (24/35)
Negative112435
Total6834102
Joint approach positive6716898.53 (67/68)97.06 (33/34)98.04 (100/102)98.53 (67/68)97.06 (33/34)
Negative13334
Total6834102
χ28.9188.66719.3737.9259.683
P value0.0120.0130.0010.0190.008
Table 2 Clinical T staging results of gastric cancer by different diagnostic methods
PathologyCasesGastrointestinal endoscopy
Accuracy, %MDCT
Accuracy, %MDCT + gastrointestinal endoscopy
Accuracy, %
T1
T2
T3
T4
T1
T2
T3
T4
T1
T2
T3
T4
T1121020083.331110091.6712000100.00
T2181161088.882151083.331170094.44
T3260322184.620223188.460125096.15
T4120021083.330021083.3300012100.00
Total681121251185.291318261186.761318251197.06
Table 3 Clinical N staging results of gastric cancer by different diagnostic methods
PathologyCasesGastrointestinal endoscopy
Accuracy, %
95%CI
MDCT
Accuracy, %
95%CI
MDCT + gastrointestinal endoscopy
Accuracy, %95%CI
N0
N1
N2
N3
N0
N1
N2
N3
N0
N1
N2
N3
N0181530083.33(58.58-96.42)1620088.89(65.29-98.62)1710094.44(72.71-99.86)
N1194132068.42(43.45-87.42)3160084.21(60.42-96.62)1171089.47(66.86-98.70)
N2210417080.95(58.09-94.55)0417080.95(58.09-94.55)0120095.24(76.18-99.88)
N310007330.00(6.67-65.25)005550.00(18.71-81.29)001990.00(55.50-99.75)
Total68192026370.59(58.32-81.00)192122579.41(67.94-88.26)181922992.65(83.68-97.57)