English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background and Objectives: Calcifying fibrous tumor (CFT) in the stomach is extremely rare and is easily misdiagnosed as a gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). This study aims to determine the best method to differentiate between gastric CFT and GIST after a systemic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods: A systematic search of articles using electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS) was conducted and resulted in 162 articles with 272 CFT cases published from January 1988 to September 2019. Results: Of these cases, 272 patients, 60 patients with gastric CFT (32 men and 28 women, mean age 49.2 years) were analyzed. The mean tumor size was 2.4 cm in patients with gastric CFT. Both endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography (CT) findings revealed well-defined (100% vs. 77.8%), heterogeneous (100% vs. 77.8%), iso-hypoechoic (71.4% vs. 33.3%), and calcified (85.7% vs. 77.8%) lesions, respectively. The majority of patients (53.3%) were symptomatic, with the most common symptom being abdominal discomfort (55.6%). None of the patients with gastric CFT showed recurrence after treatment, and most patients received nonendoscopic treatment (56%, n = 28/50). Both age and tumor size were statistically significant in patients with gastric CFT than GIST (49.2 vs. 65.0 years and 2.4 vs. 6.0 cm; both p &lt; 0.001). The ratio of children among patients with CFT (5%) and GIST (0.05%) was also significantly different ( p = 0.037). The calcification rates of gastric CFT had significantly higher calcification rates than GIST on images of EUS and CT (85.7% vs. 3.6% and 77.8% vs. 3.6%; both p &lt; 0.001). Conclusions: Compared with patients with GIST, patients with gastric CFT were younger, had smaller tumor size, and were symptomatic. Furthermore, gastric CFT was well-defined, heterogeneous in the third layer, and had high calcification rates on the images.

Gastric Calcifying Fibrous Tumor: An Easy Misdiagnosis as Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor–A Systemic Review