4.1 Article

Brachial Plexus Tumors in a Consecutive Series of Twenty One Patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY
卷 52, 期 2, 页码 138-143

出版社

KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2012.52.2.138

关键词

Brachial plexus tumor; Nerve sheath tumor; Schwannoma; Neurofibroma; Granular cell tumor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective : This is a retrospective review of 22 surgically treated benign and malignant tumors of brachial plexus region to describe clinical presentation, the characteristics of brachial plexus tumor and clinical outcomes with a literature review. Methods : Twenty-one patients with consecutive 22 surgeries for primary brachial plexus tumors were enrolled between February 2002 and November 2011 were included in this study. The medical records of all patients were reviewed. Results : Eleven male and 1 0 female patients were enrolled. Mean age was 39 years. Three patients had brachial plexus tumor associated with neurofibromatosis (13.6%). Presenting signs and symptoms included parenthesis and numbness (54.5%), radiating pain (22.7%), direct tenderness and pain (27.2%), palpable mass (77.3%). Twelve patients presented preoperative sensory deficit (54.5%) and 9 patients presented preoperative motor deficit (40.9%). Twenty tumors (90.9%) were benign and 2 tumors (9.1%) were malignant. Benign tumors included 15 schwannomas (68.2%), 4 neurofibromas (18.2%) and 1 granular cell tumor (4.5%). There were 1 malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) and 1 malignant granular cell tumor. Gross total resection was achieved in 16 patients (72.7%), including all schwannomas, 1 neurofibroma. Subtotal resection was performed in 6 tumors (27.3%), including 3 neurofibromatosis associated with brachial plexus neurofibromas, 1 MPNST and 2 granular cell tumor in one patient. Conclusion : Resection of tumor is the choice of tumor in the most of benign and malignant brachial plexus tumors. Postoperative outcomes are related to grade of resection at surgery and pathological features of tumor.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据