| Literature DB >> 23130960 |
Vincenzo Davide Catania1, Carlo Manzoni, Mariangela Novello, Libero Lauriola, Antonella Coli.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of palpable neck masses may be a diagnostic problem in pediatric patients, with differential diagnosis including congenital, inflammatory, tumoral and traumatic lesions. Ultrasonography is usually a satisfactory method to make a correct pre-operative evaluation of neck masses, although diagnosis is often challenging for the surgeon and the radiologist and sometimes only possible after a histopathological examination of the resected lesion. CASEEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23130960 PMCID: PMC3507769 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2431-12-172
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pediatr ISSN: 1471-2431 Impact factor: 2.125
Figure 1Ultrasonographic findings in an 8-month-old girl with a midline neck lesion. Sonogram shows a well-defined oval mass characterized by a hypoechoic peripheral layer and heterogeneous internal echoes.
Figure 2Low-magnification image of lymph node affected by angiomyomatous hamartoma. The hilar region is replaced by a dense eosinophilic tissue, leaving a residual rime of cortical lymphoid tissue. Note the striking contrast between the central area and the normal peripheral tissue. Original magnification, x 5; hematoxylin-eosin stain.
Figure 3At higher magnification, the inner area of the lymph node shows irregular vessels and smooth muscle cells haphazardly interspersed throughout a collagenous stroma. Original magnification, x 100; hematoxylin-eosin stain.
Cases of angiomyomatous hamartoma reported in literature
| 1-12 | Chan et al., 1992
[ | 80 | M | L inguinal |
| | 24 | M | L inguinal | |
| | 10 | F | L inguinal | |
| | 19 | M | L inguinal | |
| | 19 | M | R inguinal | |
| | 50 | F | L inguinal | |
| | 31 | M | R inguinal | |
| | 56 | M | R inguinal | |
| | 60 | M | L inguinal | |
| | 56 | M | L inguinal | |
| | 52 | M | R inguinal | |
| | 44 | M | R femoral | |
| 13 | Allen et al., 1993
[ | 67 | F | R femoral |
| 14 | Laeng et al., 1996
[ | 17 | F | L latero-cervical |
| 15 | Magro et al., 1997
[ | 68 | M | L inguinal |
| 16 | Sakurai et al., 2000
[ | 51 | M | R inguinal |
| 17 | Dargent et al., 2004
[ | 29 | M | R inguinal |
| 18 | Piedimonte et al., 2006
[ | 34 | F | L inguinal |
| 19 | Sullu et al., 2006
[ | 33 | F | R inguinal |
| 20 | Mauro et al., 2008
[ | 41 | M | L popliteal |
| 21 | Barzilai et al., 2009
[ | 51 | F | L latero-cervical |
| 22-26 | Bourgeois et al., 2009
[ | 8 | M | L inguinal |
| 15 | F | L inguinal | ||
| 30 | M | R inguinal | ||
| 50 | M | L inguinal | ||
| 57 | M | R inguinal | ||
| 27 | Ram et al., 2009
[ | 82 | M | L inguinal |
| 28 | Prusac et al., 2011
[ | 14 | M | R popliteal |
| 29 | Present case | 8 months | F | Midline cervical |