Background: Even though vascular anomalies of the hand are rare entities (7%), they are relevant regarding soft tissue mass differential diagnosis on the hand. 2 The majority of cases tend to be malformations, once denominated as deep soft tissue hemangiomas. 1 , 3 Due to evolving knowledge regarding vascular anomalies, the prognosis, guidelines regarding treatment and aftercare following therapy/surgery will be more accurate and detailed if the correct diagnosis is established. Methods: Retrospective data collection and analysis between 2008 and 2019, from the Orthopedic Department of Semmelweis University tumor registry. Comparison to the current literature (PubMed, Ovid). Study level of evidence III. Standardly distributed data with confidence level of 95%. Results: N = 16, average age of 34,2. 63,5% of lesions were digital. Hemangiomas accounted for 67%. The accuracy of clinical vs. histological diagnosis was 77%. Recurrences 25%. Variable follow up period. Conclusion: Clinical examination, radiological evaluation, patient history and fine needle biopsy are often accurate guides. Nevertheless in our study, histological analysis of the surgical biopsy was the most effective method in establishing a definite diagnosis. Conservative and watchful waiting approach are the first line, and when complemented with appropriate imaging, should suffice until absolute or relative operative indications are present.
Background: Even though vascular anomalies of the hand are rare entities (7%), they are relevant regarding soft tissue mass differential diagnosis on the hand. 2 The majority of cases tend to be malformations, once denominated as deep soft tissue hemangiomas. 1 , 3 Due to evolving knowledge regarding vascular anomalies, the prognosis, guidelines regarding treatment and aftercare following therapy/surgery will be more accurate and detailed if the correct diagnosis is established. Methods: Retrospective data collection and analysis between 2008 and 2019, from the Orthopedic Department of Semmelweis University tumor registry. Comparison to the current literature (PubMed, Ovid). Study level of evidence III. Standardly distributed data with confidence level of 95%. Results: N = 16, average age of 34,2. 63,5% of lesions were digital. Hemangiomas accounted for 67%. The accuracy of clinical vs. histological diagnosis was 77%. Recurrences 25%. Variable follow up period. Conclusion: Clinical examination, radiological evaluation, patient history and fine needle biopsy are often accurate guides. Nevertheless in our study, histological analysis of the surgical biopsy was the most effective method in establishing a definite diagnosis. Conservative and watchful waiting approach are the first line, and when complemented with appropriate imaging, should suffice until absolute or relative operative indications are present.