4.5 Article

The common ultrasonographic features of pilomatricoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE
Volume 24, Issue 10, Pages 1397-1402

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.7863/jum.2005.24.10.1397

Keywords

calcifying epithelioma; diagnosis; pilomatricoma; ultrasonography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. The purpose of this series was to describe typical ultrasonographic features of 20 cases of pilomatricoma and to improve its diagnostic rate with the use of an ultrasonographic approach. Methods. For 20 pilomatricomas in 10 patients with preoperative ultrasonography from 1995 to 2004, we reviewed age, sex, symptoms, duration, referring clinician, and tumor sites. The ultrasonographic findings were retrospectively analyzed for tumor location, shape, size, margin, echo texture, echogencity, presence, amount, and shape of calcification, presence of a hypoechoic rim, and Doppler flow pattern. Results. The mean age of the 19 patients was 6.9 years (range, 1-21 years), and the female-male ratio was 1.1:1. Patients had a painful. palpable mass in 10 cases (50%). Nine lesions occurred in the neck, 5 in the cheek, 2 in the preauricular region, and 4 in the extremity. All tumors were located in the subcutaneous layer. The mean size of the tumors was 13.4 mm. Fourteen pilomatricomas (70%) appeared as well-defined oval masses. Tumors were heterogeneously hyperechoic in 80% of cases. All tumors had internal echogenic foci. A hypoechoic rim was seen in 17 cases (8 %). Doppler flow signals were observed in the peripheral region in 14 cases (70%). A correct preoperative diagnosis was made in 33% on the basis of clinical findings and in 76% by ultrasonography. Conclusions. Diagnosis of pilomatricoma should be considered when a well-defined mass with inner. echogenic foci and a peripheral hypoechoic rim or a completely echogenic mass with strong posterior acoustic shadowing in the subcutaneous layer of the head, neck, or extremity is found on ultrasonography.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available