[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
IJRR Information::
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Keywords
For Authors::
Aims and Scope
Call for Papers
Submission Instructions
For Reviewers::
Referee page
Subscription::
Subscription Form
News & Events::
Journal News
Web Mail::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
ISSN
Hard Copy 2322-3243
Online 2345-4229
..
Online Submission
Now you can send your articles to IJRR office using the article submission system.
..

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE
Volume 23, Issue 3 (7-2025)                   Int J Radiat Res 2025, 23(3): 585-591 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Yu M, Sun H, Jiang X, Yang X. Analysis of the value of test bolus and bolus tracking in diagnosing gastric cancer. Int J Radiat Res 2025; 23 (3) :585-591
URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-6536-en.html
Analysis of the value of test bolus and bolus tracking in diagnosing gastric cancer
M.M. Yu , H. Sun , X. Jiang , X.S. Yang
Department of Oncology, Shandong Provincial KeyMedical and Health Discipline, Qingdao Central Hospital, University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Qingdao, Shandong, China , 13863966910@139.com
Abstract:   (481 Views)
Background: To explore the clinical value of Test Bolus (TB) scanning technology and Bolus Tracking (BT) technology in the preoperative TNM staging of gastric cancer (GC) patients and the enhanced display of perigastric arteries. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical information of 107 gastric cancer patients with complete imaging and pathological diagnostic data (TB group: 30 cases, BT group: 77 cases). Chi-square tests and t-tests were used to compare baseline information between the TB and BT groups. The consistency between the diagnostic results of the TB and BT groups and pathological examination results was analyzed using Kappa tests. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the TB and BT groups in terms of gender (P=0.499), age (P=0.419), family history of tumors (P=0.979), smoking history (P=0.269), and pain symptoms (P=0.464), while there was a statistically significant difference in alcohol consumption history (P=0.016). The imaging differences between the BT and TB groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05). Except for T staging (P=0.029), there were no statistically significant pathological differences between the BT and TB groups (P>0.05). The consistency of the TB group with pathological results was superior to that of the BT group (Kappa-T: 0.468 vs. 0.439; Kappa-N: 0.301 vs. 0.247; Kappa-M: 0.651 vs. 0.551). Conclusion: TB scanning technology can improve the staging accuracy of GC, achieving better diagnostic performance, but it cannot enhance the display of perigastric arteries.
Keywords: Test bolus, bolus tracking, gastric cancer, consistency test.
Full-Text [PDF 1423 kb]   (122 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Radiation Biology
References
1. Song WC, Qiao XL, Gao XZ (2015) A comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and radical surgery for early gastric cancer: a retrospective study. World J Surg Oncol, 13: 309. [DOI:10.1186/s12957-015-0724-1]
2. Li Z, Shan F, Ying X et al. (2018) Laparoscopic or open distal gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: study protocol for a randomised phase II trial. BMJ Open, 8: e021633. [DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021633]
3. Han M, Zhang M, Qi M et al. (2023) Regulatory mechanism and promising clinical application of exosomal circular RNA in gastric cancer. Front Oncol, 13: 1236679. [DOI:10.3389/fonc.2023.1236679]
4. Shi H, Li A, Dai Z et al. (2023) IL-15 armoring enhances the antitumor efficacy of claudin 18.2-targeting CAR-T cells in syngeneic mouse tumor models. Front Immunol, 14: 1165404. [DOI:10.3389/fimmu.2023.1165404]
5. Huang Y, Zhang H, Gu X et al. (2021) Elucidating the role of serum tRF-31-U5YKFN8DYDZDD as a Novel diagnostic biomarker in gastric cancer (GC). Front Oncol, 11: 723753. [DOI:10.3389/fonc.2021.723753]
6. Bie LY, Li N, Deng WY et al. (2020) Serum miR-191 and miR-425 as diagnostic and prognostic markers of advanced gastric cancer can predict the sensitivity of FOLFOX chemotherapy regimen. Onco Targets Ther, 13: 1705-1715. [DOI:10.2147/OTT.S233086]
7. Cao GD, Chen K, Xiong MM et al. (2016) HER3, but not HER4, plays an essential role in the clinicopathology and prognosis of gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One, 11: e0161219. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0161219]
8. Guo Y, Dong X, Jin J et al. (2021) The expression patterns and prognostic value of the proteasome activator subunit gene family in gastric cancer based on integrated analysis. Front Cell Dev Biol, 9: 663001. [DOI:10.3389/fcell.2021.663001]
9. Nakauchi M, Vos EL, Carr RA et al. (2023) Distinct differences in gastroesophageal junction and gastric adenocarcinoma in 2194 patients: In Memory of Rebecca A. Carr, February 24, 1988-January 19, 2021. Ann Surg, 277: 629-636. [DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000005320]
10. Shu P, Cheng L, Xie C et al. (2022) Reverse rolling-mat type lymph node dissection is the key step to solve the operative difficulties in hand-assisted laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy. BMC Surg, 22: 2. [DOI:10.1186/s12893-021-01460-4]
11. Kwak S, Duncan M, Johnston FM et al. (2024) Cross-sectional imaging of gastric cancer: pearls, pitfalls and lessons learned from multidisciplinary conference. Abdom Radiol (NY), 49:4400. [DOI:10.1007/s00261-024-04392-8]
12. Chen ZD, Zhang PF, Xi HQ et al. (2021) Recent advances in the diagnosis, staging, treatment, and prognosis of advanced gastric cancer: A literature review. Front Med (Lausanne), 8: 744839. [DOI:10.3389/fmed.2021.744839]
13. Yamaguchi T, Ichikawa K, Takahashi D et al. (2017) A new contrast enhancement protocol for subtraction coronary computed tomography requiring a short breath-holding time. Acad Radiol, 24: 38-44. [DOI:10.1016/j.acra.2016.08.025]
14. Schomburg L, Malouhi A, Grimm MO et al. (2022) iRECIST-based versus non-standardized free text reporting of CT scans for monitoring metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective comparison. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 148: 2003-2012. [DOI:10.1007/s00432-022-03997-0]
15. Kamr WH, El-Tantawy AM, Harraz MM et al. (2020) Pulmonary embolism: Low dose contrast MSCT pulmonary angiography with modified test bolus technique. Eur J Radiol Open, 7: 100254. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100254]
16. Joo I, Kim SH, Ahn SJ et al. (2017) Preoperative tumor restaging and resectability assessment of gastric cancers after chemotherapy: diagnostic accuracy of MDCT using new staging criteria. Abdom Radiol (NY,) 42: 2807-2815. [DOI:10.1007/s00261-017-1224-2]
17. Edge SB, American Joint Committee on Cancer ACS (2010) AJCC cancer staging handbook: from the AJCC cancer staging manual. vol. 19: Springer.
18. Ren XC and Liang P (2023) Analysis of influencing factors of nerve invasion in locally advanced gastric cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY), 48: 3005-3011. [DOI:10.1007/s00261-023-03970-6]
19. Gupta P, Sinha A, Khandelwal N (2014) Automatic scan triggering software "confused": Computed tomography angiography in foot arteriovenous malformation! Indian J Radiol Imaging, 24: 125-128. [DOI:10.4103/0971-3026.134387]
20. Moradi M and Khalili B (2016) Qualitative indices and enhancement rate of CT pulmonary angiography in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: Comparison between test bolus and bolus-tracking methods. Adv Biomed Res, 5: 113. [DOI:10.4103/2277-9175.184309]
21. Martin ML, Tay KH, Flak B et al. (2003) Multidetector CT angiography of the aortoiliac system and lower extremities: a prospective comparison with digital subtraction angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 180: 1085-1091. [DOI:10.2214/ajr.180.4.1801085]
22. Cademartiri F, Nieman K, van der Lugt A et al. (2004) Intravenous contrast material administration at 16-detector row helical CT coronary angiography: test bolus versus bolus-tracking technique. Radiology, 233: 817-823. [DOI:10.1148/radiol.2333030668]
23. Murphy DJ, Aghayev A, Steigner ML (2018) Vascular CT and MRI: a practical guide to imaging protocols. Insights Imaging, 9: 215-236. [DOI:10.1007/s13244-018-0597-2]
24. Iuga AI, Doerner J, Siedek F et al. (2019) Computed tomography pulmonary angiograms using a novel dual-layer spectral detector: Adjusted window settings are essential for diagnostic image quality. Medicine (Baltimore) 98, e16606. [DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000016606]
25. Voit D, Kollmeier JM, Kalentev O et al. (2023) Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in two minutes: cross-sectional real-time coverage of multiple volumes. Quant Imaging Med Surg, 13: 8739-8746. [DOI:10.21037/qims-23-923]
26. Yen YA, Huang WS, Chiu CH et al. (2020) Does routine triple-time-point FDG PET/CT imaging improve the detection of liver metastases? Diagnostics (Basel), 10: 9609. [DOI:10.3390/diagnostics10090609]
27. Bai RJ, Ren SH, Jiang HJ et al. (2017) Accuracy of multi-slice spiral computed tomography for preoperative tumor node metastasis (TNM) staging of colorectal carcinoma. Med Sci Monit, 23: 3470-3479. [DOI:10.12659/MSM.902649]
28. Ozkurt H, Ozdogan S, Camurcuoglu E (2023) Split Bolus Method in Computerized Tomography. Sisli Etfal Hastan Tip Bul, 57: 18-24. [DOI:10.14744/SEMB.2022.17003]
29. Shi C, Liu B, Yan J et al. (2016) Gastric cancer: preoperative TNM staging with individually adjusted computed tomography scanning phase. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 40: 160-166. [DOI:10.1097/RCT.0000000000000339]
30. Jiang ZY, Kinami S, Nakamura N et al. (2020) Diagnostic ability of multi-detector spiral computed tomography for pathological lymph node metastasis of advanced gastric cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol, 12: 435-446. [DOI:10.4251/wjgo.v12.i4.435]
31. Yu T, Wang X, Zhao Z et al. (2015) Prediction of T stage in gastric carcinoma by enhanced CT and oral contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. World J Surg Oncol, 13: 184. [DOI:10.1186/s12957-015-0577-7]
32. Han Y, Wang T, Lin L et al. (2022) Feasibility study of the best monitoring time-interval to track contrast agent bolus in dual-source coronary computed tomography angiography. International Journal of Radiation Research, 20: 145-150. [DOI:10.52547/ijrr.20.1.22]
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Radiation Research
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.03 seconds with 50 queries by YEKTAWEB 4722