Epidural Hemangioma: A Clinical Series of Five Patients and Review of Literature for the Decade.
epidural tumor
hemangioma
magnetic resonance imaging
Journal
Spine surgery and related research
ISSN: 2432-261X
Titre abrégé: Spine Surg Relat Res
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101718059
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
25
06
2020
accepted:
04
08
2020
entrez:
28
6
2021
pubmed:
29
6
2021
medline:
29
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Since 1929, only 171 epidural hemangioma cases have been reported. We report five epidural hemangiomas and review cases reported over the past decade in terms of radiological features and clinical findings. Among patients operated on for spinal tumors at our hospital between 2009 and 2020, five had epidural hemangiomas. We retrospectively examined patient records and images and reviewed relevant English literature in PubMed from 2009 to 2019. Eighty-seven epidural hemangioma cases were reported in the last 10 years. Among 87 cases, the average age was 49.58 years; 43 and 44 cases were male and female, respectively. The most common lesion level was thoracic (59.8%), while common symptoms were back pain (42.5%); numbness, hypoesthesia, or anesthesia (37.9%); paraparesis (34.5%); and radicular pain (20.7%). On magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 77.1% showed hypo-isointensity on T1-weighted image (WI), hyperintensity on T2WI, and homogenous enhanced patterns with contrast. Total resection was performed in most cases, with good clinical outcomes. Preoperative embolization was performed in four cases, with good surgical outcomes. The median follow-up duration of postoperative MRI was 16 months, and no case had recurrence. Epidural hemangiomas are extremely rare and may be difficult to diagnose preoperatively. They should be considered if a dumbbell-shaped or epidural hypervascular lesion is noted. The treatment of choice for epidural hemangioma is total resection, with most cases having good clinical outcomes. Preoperative embolization may be useful for reducing bleeding. Although there were almost no recurrences after resection, careful follow-up for longer periods is required.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Since 1929, only 171 epidural hemangioma cases have been reported. We report five epidural hemangiomas and review cases reported over the past decade in terms of radiological features and clinical findings.
METHODS
METHODS
Among patients operated on for spinal tumors at our hospital between 2009 and 2020, five had epidural hemangiomas. We retrospectively examined patient records and images and reviewed relevant English literature in PubMed from 2009 to 2019. Eighty-seven epidural hemangioma cases were reported in the last 10 years.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among 87 cases, the average age was 49.58 years; 43 and 44 cases were male and female, respectively. The most common lesion level was thoracic (59.8%), while common symptoms were back pain (42.5%); numbness, hypoesthesia, or anesthesia (37.9%); paraparesis (34.5%); and radicular pain (20.7%). On magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 77.1% showed hypo-isointensity on T1-weighted image (WI), hyperintensity on T2WI, and homogenous enhanced patterns with contrast. Total resection was performed in most cases, with good clinical outcomes. Preoperative embolization was performed in four cases, with good surgical outcomes. The median follow-up duration of postoperative MRI was 16 months, and no case had recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Epidural hemangiomas are extremely rare and may be difficult to diagnose preoperatively. They should be considered if a dumbbell-shaped or epidural hypervascular lesion is noted. The treatment of choice for epidural hemangioma is total resection, with most cases having good clinical outcomes. Preoperative embolization may be useful for reducing bleeding. Although there were almost no recurrences after resection, careful follow-up for longer periods is required.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34179548
doi: 10.22603/ssrr.2020-0120
pmc: PMC8208943
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
133-143Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 by The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that there are no relevant conflicts of interest.
Références
Neoplasma. 2001;48(1):82-4
pubmed: 11327544
Br J Neurosurg. 2018 Oct;32(5):577-578
pubmed: 28637111
Eur Spine J. 2010 Jul;19 Suppl 2:S193-6
pubmed: 20213297
Br J Neurosurg. 2019 Mar 4;:1-4
pubmed: 30829069
Neurosurgery. 2009 Jun;64(6):E1202-3; discussion E1203
pubmed: 19487867
Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2006 Sep;46(9):455-8
pubmed: 16998281
Neurol India. 2009 Jan-Feb;57(1):88-90
pubmed: 19305089
Surg Neurol. 1990 Nov;34(5):345-51
pubmed: 2218857
J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2016 Jul-Sep;7(3):176-83
pubmed: 27630480
World J Orthop. 2016 Feb 18;7(2):109-16
pubmed: 26925382
Surg Neurol Int. 2015 Jun 25;6(Suppl 10):S309-12
pubmed: 26167367
Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2003 Oct;43(10):471-5; discussion 476
pubmed: 14620197
Eur Spine J. 2012 Oct;21(10):2019-26
pubmed: 22581192
J Craniofac Surg. 2016 Oct;27(7):e619-e620
pubmed: 27483108
J Orthop Sci. 2010 May;15(3):350-6
pubmed: 20559803
Turk Neurosurg. 2019;29(4):607-610
pubmed: 30649781
Oncol Lett. 2018 Apr;15(4):6036-6042
pubmed: 29552231
Strahlenther Onkol. 1999 Aug;175(8):405-8
pubmed: 10481773
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2015 Oct 03;4(4):366-70
pubmed: 26568825
Surg Neurol. 1982 Dec;18(6):463-5
pubmed: 7163968
Neurosurgery. 1994 Nov;35(5):856-63; discussion 863-4
pubmed: 7838334
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2012 Oct;52(4):407-9
pubmed: 23133733
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2011 Nov;153(11):2279-81
pubmed: 21822781
Eur Spine J. 2013 Mar;22(3):542-7
pubmed: 23053760