Journals / Haydarpaşa Numune Medical Journal / 2020 / Cilt: 60 - Sayı: 4

Neoplastic and Non-neoplastic Lesions of the Skull: Single-Center Experience

Pages
367–372
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Following the detailed clinical and radiological evaluation for these lesions, the total excision of the lesion to the extent possible is particularly important for the prognosis of the disease.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: Tumor lesions of the skull bones are extremely rare; they are usually slow-growing but clinically aggressive.
📊
Key Findings & Data:They constitute approximately 1% of all bone tumors.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Following the detailed clinical and radiological evaluation for these lesions, the total excision of the lesion to the extent possible is particularly important for the prognosis of the disease.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010-2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Introduction: Tumor lesions of the skull bones are extremely rare; they are usually slow-growing but clinically aggressive. They constitute approximately 1% of all bone tumors. Although they are usually benign, malignant and metastatic lesions may also be seen. This retrospective study aimed to emphasize the importance of the histo-pathological diagnosis and surgical excision amount inplanning the treatment in advance. Methods: In this study, the age and gender distribution of the cases, the location of the lesions, the surgical method, histopathological diagnoses and the preferred cranioplasty methods were included over 17 cases that were operated by our clinic between 2010-2020. Nine cases were male (52%) and eight cases were female (48%). When the diagnosis was made, the mean age was 24.3 (2 years-49 years) in the cases, while seven of the cases were children (3 girls, 4 boys). In our study, children under 17 were considered as childhood. Results: The patients’ admission symptoms were palpable pain-free mass (n=9), painful mass (n=4), visual field defect and/ or vision loss related to lesion location, focal neurological deficits due to 7th cranial nerve involvement. (n=1), exophthalmos (n=1), and one patient was an incidental diagnosis while examined for primary disease. Lesions exerted locations in the frontal bone (frontal bone and orbital roof ) (n=9), occipital bone (occipital bone and clivus) (n=5), sphenoid bone (sphenoid wing and paracellar (n=1), and lesions were multiple in two cases (n=2). One patient had a diagnosis of metastatic leiomy- oma before admission and one had multiple myeloma, while the other patients had no known chronic diseases. Discussion and Conclusion: Lesions of the skull bones are rare in the clinic. Following the detailed clinical and radiological evaluation for these lesions, the total excision of the lesion to the extent possible is particularly important for the prognosis of the disease.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARI, R., ÖZLÜ, E. B. K., ELMACI, İ. (2020). Neoplastic and Non-neoplastic Lesions of the Skull: Single-Center Experience. Haydarpaşa Numune Medical Journal, Cilt: 60 - Sayı: 4, 367–372. https://ajindex.com/articles/160168

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Kakkar A, Nambirajan A, Suri V, Sarkar C, Kale SS, Singh M, et al. Primary Bone Tumors of the Skull: Spectrum of 125 Cases, with Review of Literature. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2016;77:319– 25
  2. Arana E, Martí-Bonmatí L. CT and MR imaging of focal calvarial lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;172:1683–8
  3. Shah MV, Haines SJ. Pediatric skull, skull base, and meningeal tumors. Neurosurg Clin N Am 1992;3:893–924
  4. Lloret I, Server A, Taksdal I. Calvarial lesions: a radiological ap- proach to diagnosis. Acta Radiol 2009;50:531–42
  5. Gomez CK, Schiffman SR, Bhatt AA. Radiological review of skull lesions. Insights Imaging 2018;9:857–82
  6. Gibson SE, Prayson RA. Primary skull lesions in the pedi- atric population: a 25-year experience. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007;131:761–6
  7. Ozgiray E, Perumal K, Cinar C, Caliskan KE, Ertan Y, Yurtseven T, et al. Management of Calvarial Tumors: A Retrospective Anal- ysis and Literature Review. Turk Neurosurg 2016;26:690–8
  8. Cummings TJ, George TM, Fuchs HE, McLendon RE. The pathol- ogy of extracranial scalp and skull masses in young children. Clin Neuropathol 2004;23:34–43
  9. Guidetti B, Gagliardi FM. Epidermoid and dermoid cysts. Clinical evaluation and late surgical results. J Neurosurg 1977;47:12–8
  10. Stark AM, Eichmann T, Mehdorn HM. Skull metastases: clinical features, differential diagnosis, and review of the literature. Surg Neurol 2003;60:219–25
  11. Wecht DA, Sawaya R. Lesions of the calvaria: surgical experi- ence with 42 patients. Ann Surg Oncol 1997;4:28–36
  12. Fujimura M, Nishijima M, Umezawa K, Hayashi T, Kaimori M. A case of calvarial eosinophilic granuloma with rapid expansion and wide skull invasion: immunohistochemical analysis of Ki- 67. J Clin Neurosci 2002;9:72–6
  13. Doğan I, Kahiloğulları G, Ünlü MA. Pediatrik Hastalarda Orta Hat Yerleşimli Primer Kalvaryal Kitlelerin Cerrahi Tedavisi: Tek Merkezli Klinik Tecrübe ve Cerrahi Teknik. Van Tıp Derg 2016;23:263–8
  14. Rosinski CL, Patel S, Geever B, Chiu RG, Chaker AN, Zakrzewski J, et al. A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of Titanium Mesh and Custom Implants for Cranioplasty. Neurosurgery 2020;86:E15–E22
  15. Harris DA, Fong AJ, Buchanan EP, Monson L, Khechoyan D, Lam S. History of synthetic materials in alloplastic cranio- plasty. Neurosurg Focus 2014;36:E20
  16. Shah AM, Jung H, Skirboll S. Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis. Neurosurg Focus 2014;36:E19
  17. Yano H, Tanaka K, Matsuo T, Tsuda M, Akita S, Hirano A. Cranio-