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

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

[Differential diagnosis of non-epithelial rectal neoplasms].

Authors: G I, Vorobév; T S, Odariuk; Iu A, Shelygin; L L, Kapuller; B S, Korniak; A A, Tikhonov; L P, Orlova;

[Differential diagnosis of non-epithelial rectal neoplasms].

Abstract

Experience in the treatment of 118 patients with nonepithelial new growths of the rectum has been accumulated at the Scientific Research Institute of Proctology in the period from 1970 to 1991. They accounted for 1.5% of all benign and malignant tumors of this organ. Leiomyoma was diagnosed in 44, leiomyosarcoma in 18, lipoma in 30, fibroma in 17, neurinoma in 7 and rhabdomyoma in 2 of these patients. A differential diagnosis was made between benign and malignant tumors, as well as with other nonepithelial new growth of the rectum. On the basis of the clinical picture and the results of digital and instrumental (radiological, endoscopic, and ultrasonic) examination of the rectum the correct preoperative diagnosis may be established with certain probability. This influences directly the choice of the volume of the operative intervention in various types of nonepithelial rectal tumors. Morphological verification of the tumor is the principal method of examination in establishing the differential diagnosis in the preoperative and postoperative periods.

Keywords

Adult, Leiomyosarcoma, Male, Leiomyoma, Rectal Neoplasms, Fibrosarcoma, Reproducibility of Results, Middle Aged, Rhabdomyoma, Proctoscopy, Diagnosis, Differential, Preoperative Care, Humans, Female, Lipoma, Physical Examination, Neurilemmoma

  • 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).
    0
    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).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
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!
0
Average
Average
Average
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!