Keywords:
Tissue characterisation, Neoplasia, Observer performance, Education, Ultrasound-Colour Doppler, Ultrasound, Neuroradiology peripheral nerve, Musculoskeletal system, Musculoskeletal soft tissue
Authors:
D. Vergara1, M. caruso2, C. Panico2, U. passaretti1, A. Passaretti1, I. Punzo1, E. Vergara3, A. Brunetti2, P. Gisonni4; 1Naples/IT, 2Napoli/IT, 3Frattamaggiore/IT, 4Napoli (NA)/IT
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2019/C-1820
Results
Differentiation between schwannomas and neurofibromas is known to be difficult on the basis of sonographic findings,
and can lead to misdiagnosis (3).
For this reason,
particular attention has to be payed on some aspects as well-defined margins,
a homogeneous hypoechoic appearance,
a round to oval shape.
In the analysis of neurofibroma is not possible to identify the entering and exiting nerves,
and the presence of a target sign (4).
Vascularization is usually more important in schwannoma than in neurofibroma,
but on clinical practice,
is hard to distinguish the cut-off.
Surgical treatment is different in this two condition,
and it’s strongly affected by preoperative diagnosis.
When the diagnosis of schwannoma is made,
a microsurgical technique is the treatment of choise,
with nerve spairing and restitution ad integrum (5).
While in neurofibroma a surgical resection is necessary due to the origin from nerve shealt.
At histological exam 3 patients were diagnosed with schwannoma.
Ultrasound evaluation has been important in preoperative diagnosis,
avoiding invalidating outcomes.