TABLE 3.
Comparative Imaging Features of Esophageal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST) Versus Esophageal Leiomyoma
| Imaging Feature | Esophageal GIST | Esophageal Leiomyoma |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Tumor size, mean (range) diameter (cm) | 5.6 (3.8–10.0) | 2.6 (2.4–4.7) |
| Location (craniocaudal) | Predominantly distal (75%) | Mid third (40%) and distal third (50%) |
| Laterality | Predominantly right (75%); almost never midline | Predominantly midline (60%) or left (30%) |
| Esophagoscopy | Mucosal ulceration (38%); submucosal lesion | Normal mucosa (100%); submucosal lesion |
| Chest radiograph | Posterior mediastinal mass | Posterior mediastinal mass |
| Esophagogram | Smooth, nonobstructive submucosal filling defect | Smooth, nonobstructive submucosal filling defect |
| Mean unenhanced CT attenuation, numeric or qualitative (HU) | 34 (range, 23–43) (n = 5) | 41 (n = 1) |
| Mean contrast-enhanced CT attenuation, numeric or qualitative (HU) | 64 (range, 30–100) (n = 6) | 39 (range, 27–47) (n = 5) |
| Mean enhancement (HU)a | 23 (n = 5); moderate enhancing | 4 (n = 1); minimal to no enhancement |
| Calcifications | Rare (n = 1); eccentric, coarse | Uncommon (20%); diffuse popcorn |
| FDG avidity | Uniform marked FDG avidity; mean SUVmax, 16 (range, 10–20) | Usually not FDG avid (66%); mild FDG avidity possible; mean SUVmax, 2.3 (range, 0–7.1) |
Note—SUVmax = maximum standardized uptake value.
a
Mean enhancement based only on studies with both unenhanced and contrast-enhanced values.