Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Myositis ossificans circumscripta: the contribution of imaging].

Authors: R, Alouini-Mekki; H, El Mhabrech; I, Hasni; M, Allani; H, Jemni; W, Gamaoun; B, M'hamed; +2 Authors

[Myositis ossificans circumscripta: the contribution of imaging].

Abstract

Illustrate the specific and nonspecific aspects of myositis ossificans circumscripta (MOC) in standard imaging, cross-sectional imaging (sonography, CT, and MRI), and bone scintigraphy.Eight patients presenting with MOC (three men and five women) were explored using standard radiography (eight cases), sonography (seven cases), scintigraphy (four cases), CT (six cases), and MRI (four cases).Standard x-rays and sonography of the soft tissue showed a well-defined mass containing calcifications in 75% of the cases. The CT scan diagnosed MOC in four cases, showing calcified masses separated from the adjacent bone by a clear radiotransparent border or afferent peripheral tumoral calcifications highly suggestive of MOC. MRI was nonspecific. Bone scintigraphy showed hyperfixation in the four cases imaged.Standard x-rays were useful to demonstrate the calcifications of MOC and to identify their relation with the subjacent bone. Sonography and bone scintigraphy were interesting in monitoring the lesion's maturation. In addition to early detection of calcifications, CT can precisely localize the lesion before surgical ablation. MRI is a very sensitive technique in detecting small lesions at an early stage, but it is nonspecific and does not remove the necessity of biopsy to eliminate the possibility of a malignant disease.

Keywords

Male, Myositis Ossificans, Humans, Female, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Ultrasonography

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    18
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
18
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!