Phlebology · 2013
Intraosseous venous malformations of the facial bone: a retrospective study in 11 patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhu C, Zhu H G, Zhang Z Y, Wang L Z, Zheng J W, Ye W M, He Y, Wang Y A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical symptoms, computed tomography (CT) features and treatments of intraosseous venous malformations (IVM) that occur in the facial bone.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Eleven patients with facial IVM were treated with two surgical techniques, excision (n = 4) or curettage (n = 7). No recurrence was encountered at follow-up (45.8 ± 16.0 months). Postoperative deformities were left in two paediatric patients who were treated with excision.
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of IVM can be difficult and is mainly based on clinical symptoms and CT features. IVM should be differentiated from other lesions, including ameloblastoma, odontogenic cysts, osteosarcoma, aneurysmal bone cysts and arteriovenous malformations, among others. Conventional block biopsy should be replaced by fine needle aspiration cytology for further diagnosis. Curettage is a more appropriate method for IVM compared with excessive en-bloc osteotomy, while transosseous embolo-sclerotherapy may be a promising alternative method. Finally, the terminological confusion between 'intraosseous haemangioma' and 'intraosseous venous malformation' should be avoided according to the binary classification.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Eleven patients with facial IVM were treated with two surgical techniques, excision (n = 4) or curettage (n = 7). No recurrence was encountered at follow-up (45.8 ± 16.0 months). Postoperative deformities were left in two paediatric patients who were treated with excision.
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of IVM can be difficult and is mainly based on clinical symptoms and CT features. IVM should be differentiated from other lesions, including ameloblastoma, odontogenic cysts, osteosarcoma, aneurysmal bone cysts and arteriovenous malformations, among others. Conventional block biopsy should be replaced by fine needle aspiration cytology for further diagnosis. Curettage is a more appropriate method for IVM compared with excessive en-bloc osteotomy, while transosseous embolo-sclerotherapy may be a promising alternative method. Finally, the terminological confusion between 'intraosseous haemangioma' and 'intraosseous venous malformation' should be avoided according to the binary classification.