4.5 Article

Solid variant of aneurysmal bone cysts in long tubular bones: Giant cell reparative granuloma

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY
卷 180, 期 6, 页码 1681-1687

出版社

AMER ROENTGEN RAY SOC
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.180.6.1801681

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine the age distribution, location, and imaging features of histologically proven solid variants of aneurysmal bone cysts in long tubular bones. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We performed a retrospective review of imaging studies of histologically proven solid aneurysmal bone cysts in long bones between 1961 and 2001. There were 30 cases comprising 29 radiographic, six CT, and eight MR imaging examinations. The lesions were evaluated for bone involved, location within a long bone, matrix, size, soft-tissue mass, and MR imaging characteristics. The imaging findings were correlated with the histologic findings. RESULTS. The patients were 17 females and 13 males ranging in age from 2 to 58 years (mean, 18 years). The bones involved were the femur (n = 10), the ulna (n = 7), the tibia (n = 7), the humerus (n = 2), the radius (n = 2), and the fibula (n = 2). The lesions were five juxtaarticular, 13 metaphyseal, one diametaphyseal, and 11 diaphyseal. The location was eccentric in 20 cases, of which two were intracortical and two periosteal, and central in 10. Lesion size varied between 1 and 7 cm. Thirty-three percent of lesions were nonaneurysmal. Four lesions were mineralized. A soft-tissue mass was present in four cases. Four lesions showed a permeative-lytic pattern simulating a malignant process. Unusual findings included periosteal reaction and development of a solid aneurysmal bone cyst in a preexisting fracture. MR imaging showed solid elements in all cases and pronounced edema in 50% of cases. CONCLUSION. Solid aneurysmal bone cyst is a reactive nonneoplastic bone lesion with varied imaging characteristics; one third of lesions are nonaneurysmal.

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

4.5
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