These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Is it a haemangioma?
    Author: Shamsi K, Deckers F, De Schepper A.
    Journal: Rofo; 1993 Jul; 159(1):22-7. PubMed ID: 8334252.
    Abstract:
    A retrospective study of 92 cases of proven haemangiomas is presented. In this study, we evaluated the degree of confidence of the radiologist in differentiating haemangioma by ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), angiography (AR), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in an incidental and an oncologic (high risk) population. The diagnosis of haemangioma was confirmed by surgery, by fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) and by long follow-up. Maximum lesions were diagnosed with high confidence by MRI (88-93%) and by angiography (85-91%) in both incidental and oncologic group. 44% of the lesions were confidently diagnosed in incidental group as compared to the 11% of the lesions in oncologic group by ultrasound. Similarly, lesions were diagnosed with maximum confidence in 76% in incidental group as compared to 48% in oncologic group by dynamic contrast bolus CT. Confidence was also evaluated according to the size of the lesions but due to the low number of lesions in < 1.5 cm category, the difference in the confidence levels was not apparent. We conclude that in high risk group, MRI, if available, should be directly performed after US. In the incidental finding group, if the lesion has typical features, US follow-up every 6 months is sufficient.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]