1954
DOI: 10.1001/archderm.1954.01540200077006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ectopic Gastrointestinal Mucosa in Form of Umbilical Polyp

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1954
1954
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The most apparent of these lesions is the umbilical polyp, which can be easily mistaken for pyogenic granuloma, umbilical granuloma, or hemangioma 4 . It has been reported that, histologically, the umbilical polyp is composed of aberrant pancreas, small intestinal mucosa, or ectopic gastrointestinal mucosa 5,6 . Recently, an umbilical polyp originating from urachal remnants has also been reported.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The most apparent of these lesions is the umbilical polyp, which can be easily mistaken for pyogenic granuloma, umbilical granuloma, or hemangioma 4 . It has been reported that, histologically, the umbilical polyp is composed of aberrant pancreas, small intestinal mucosa, or ectopic gastrointestinal mucosa 5,6 . Recently, an umbilical polyp originating from urachal remnants has also been reported.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 It has been reported that, histologically, the umbilical polyp is composed of aberrant pancreas, small intestinal mucosa, or ectopic gastrointestinal mucosa. 5,6 Recently, an umbilical polyp originating from urachal remnants has also been reported. A 10-year-old boy with an umbilical polyp related to the urachus was presented to stress the possibility that umbilical polyps may originate not only from the OMD, but also from urachal remnants.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…still remains an open question because the aetiology as well as pathogenesis of both are obscure. T hat they should be combined into one group (Degos 1953) is evident from the cases in which the two coexist or pass into one another, from a common pathogenesis, and response to the same treatm ent.Though rare, cases where the entire skin is involved with features of circumscribed scleroderma in particular lesions or where the one form passes into the other, or both coexist, do occur (Gottron 1930(Gottron , 1933 Zcirafonetis 1954;Shaffer 1954; Jadassohn and Paillard 1954;Longhi 1955;Christianson et al 1956;Gold 1956;Sertoli 1957;Duperrat 1957; Asboe-Hansen 1959, and others).From observation of two cases of generalized morphea, Slava ( The basic difference between m. and d.s. is th at in the former there is no visceral involvement and the disease is thus restricted to the skin and occasionally penetrates deeper into the subcutis and muscles.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%