{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025437201907790145, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0047694753577106515, 'mean_word_length': 6.241379310344827, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Diagnosis and differential diagnosis of a peritoneal carcinosis. Conventional techniques, sonography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance tomography].

Based upon the results obtained in 346 patients, the diagnostic value of conventional techniques, ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of peritoneal tumor spread is analyzed. Since such signs as ascites, mesenteric and omental infiltration and peritoneal masses are non-specific, various conditions have to be considered in the differential diagnosis. None of the imaging modalities can exclude intraperitoneal tumor spread.