Journal of cutaneous pathology · 2020
Inclusion bodies are not uncommon in angioleiomyoma.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание 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.
Kishibe Mari, Igawa Satomi, Kanno Kyoko, Matsuo Risa, Ishida-Yamamoto Akemi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Leiomyomas with eosinophilic intracytoplasmic inclusion bodies have been described in the urinary bladder, brain, gastrointestinal tract, uterus, and oral cavity but not in the skin. Prompted by our recent experience with a case of cutaneous angioleiomyoma with many inclusion bodies, we hypothesized that similar cases might have been previously overlooked.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 30 cases of angioleiomyoma and 10 cases of piloleiomyoma focusing on inclusion bodies.
RESULTS: More than 18 inclusion bodies per 250 μm squared were detected in five cases of angioleiomyoma, fewer than 11 bodies in 20 cases, and none in five cases. For the case with numerous inclusion bodies throughout the specimen, special staining was needed to make a diagnosis. No inclusion bodies were found in the piloleiomyomas.
CONCLUSION: Inclusion bodies are relatively common in angioleiomyomas and can occasionally be numerous. They may serve as a point of distinction from piloleiomyomas. Because the presence of multiple eosinophilic intracytoplasmic inclusions can result in a rhabdoid appearance and make diagnosis challenging, we should be aware of this feature in angioleiomyomas.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 30 cases of angioleiomyoma and 10 cases of piloleiomyoma focusing on inclusion bodies.
RESULTS: More than 18 inclusion bodies per 250 μm squared were detected in five cases of angioleiomyoma, fewer than 11 bodies in 20 cases, and none in five cases. For the case with numerous inclusion bodies throughout the specimen, special staining was needed to make a diagnosis. No inclusion bodies were found in the piloleiomyomas.
CONCLUSION: Inclusion bodies are relatively common in angioleiomyomas and can occasionally be numerous. They may serve as a point of distinction from piloleiomyomas. Because the presence of multiple eosinophilic intracytoplasmic inclusions can result in a rhabdoid appearance and make diagnosis challenging, we should be aware of this feature in angioleiomyomas.