Cutoff CT value can identify upper gastrointestinal bleeding on postmortem CT: Development and validation study
Naomasa Okimoto, Masanori Ishida, Wataru Gonoi, Kotaro Fujimoto, Keisuke Nyunoya, Mariko Kurokawa, Go Shirota, Hiroyuki Abe, Tetsuo Ushiku, Osamu Abe, Abhishek Das, Abhishek Das, Abhishek Das

TL;DR
This study identifies a CT value cutoff to detect upper gastrointestinal bleeding in postmortem scans, improving diagnostic accuracy.
Contribution
A novel cutoff CT value (≥27.7 HU) was developed and validated for diagnosing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in postmortem CT.
Findings
A CT value cutoff of ≥27.7 HU showed 84.6% sensitivity and 77.6% specificity in validating UGIB diagnosis.
Solid gastrointestinal content and bubbles ≥4 mm increased specificity but reduced sensitivity for UGIB diagnosis.
The cutoff CT value and solid content were found to be valid and reproducible diagnostic criteria for UGIB.
Abstract
This study aimed to establish the diagnostic criteria for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) using postmortem computed tomography (PMCT). This case-control study enrolled 27 consecutive patients with autopsy-proven UGIB and 170 of the 566 patients without UGIB who died in a university hospital in Japan after treatment and underwent both noncontrast PMCT and conventional autopsy between 2009 and 2020. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: derivation and validation sets. Imaging findings of the upper gastrointestinal contents, including CT values, were recorded and evaluated for their power to diagnose UGIB in the derivation set and validated in the validation set. In the derivation set, the mean CT value of the upper gastrointestinal contents was 48.2 Hounsfield units (HU) and 22.8 HU in cases with and without UGIB. The optimal cutoff CT value for diagnosing UGIB was ≥27.7…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAutopsy Techniques and Outcomes · Diverticular Disease and Complications · Healthcare cost, quality, practices
