Clinical imaging · 2010
Dedifferentiated liposarcoma of retroperitoneum: spectrum of imaging findings in 15 patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Hong Sun Hwa, Kim Kyeong Ah, Woo Ok Hee, Park Cheol Min, Kim Chul Hwan, Kim Myeong-Jin, Chung Jae-Joon, Han Joon Koo, Rha Sung Eun
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Dedifferentiated liposarcoma is a high-grade nonlipogenic sarcoma that arises in the background of a preexisting well-differentiated liposarcoma. The purpose of this work is to evaluate the spectrum of radiologic appearance of retroperitoneal dedifferentiated liposarcoma with clinicopathologic features.
METHODS: Radiologic images and clinical histories of 15 patients with histologically verified retroperitoneal dedifferentiated liposarcoma were retrospectively studied. Patients included 11 men and 4 women, with mean age of 55.8 years (range, 36-74 years), and they underwent computed tomography (CT) (n=15) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (n=5).
RESULTS: The mean size of the tumor was 22.6 cm with a range of 9.5-38 cm. Both CT and MRI showed well-circumscribed, large round, or lobulated retroperitoneal mass. The appearance of the tumor was classified as follows: Category I, nonfatty component within predominant fatty mass (n=5); Category II, focal fatty component within large nonfatty mass (n=6); Category III, well-defined fatty mass and well-defined nonfatty mass (n=1); Category IV, two masses with predominantly nonfatty component (n=3).
CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneal dedifferentiated liposarcomas present various spectra of imaging findings. While Categories I and III may suggest dedifferentiated liposarcoma, Categories II and IV may appear as other types of liposarcoma or other malignant retroperitoneal tumor.
METHODS: Radiologic images and clinical histories of 15 patients with histologically verified retroperitoneal dedifferentiated liposarcoma were retrospectively studied. Patients included 11 men and 4 women, with mean age of 55.8 years (range, 36-74 years), and they underwent computed tomography (CT) (n=15) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (n=5).
RESULTS: The mean size of the tumor was 22.6 cm with a range of 9.5-38 cm. Both CT and MRI showed well-circumscribed, large round, or lobulated retroperitoneal mass. The appearance of the tumor was classified as follows: Category I, nonfatty component within predominant fatty mass (n=5); Category II, focal fatty component within large nonfatty mass (n=6); Category III, well-defined fatty mass and well-defined nonfatty mass (n=1); Category IV, two masses with predominantly nonfatty component (n=3).
CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneal dedifferentiated liposarcomas present various spectra of imaging findings. While Categories I and III may suggest dedifferentiated liposarcoma, Categories II and IV may appear as other types of liposarcoma or other malignant retroperitoneal tumor.