Enlargement of the iliopsoas bursa: Unusual cause of cystic mass on pelvic sonogram

Janus, Cynthia; Hermann, George

doi:10.1002/jcu.1870100310

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 Compression of various intrapelvic structures has been also described. 5,6 Various conditions, including hernias of the intraperitoneal content, tumors, aneurysms of the iliac or common femoral vessels, and lymphadenopathy, can cause a groin mass. These conditions can present with nonspecific clinical symptoms, and imaging is usually required for diagnostic evaluation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…IB is usually associated with hip disease and presents as a mass in the groin. [1][2][3][4][5] Diagnosing IB clinically can be difficult, and imaging is usually required to differentiate IB from other groin masses such as lymphadenopathy, hernias, and tumors. We report the case of a patient with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had a giant IB that was diagnosed on the basis of sonographic findings and confirmed by MRI.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Giant iliopsoas bursitis: Sonographic findings with magnetic resonance correlations

Bianchi

Martinoli

Keller

et al. 2002

J of Clinical Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the case of a 40-year-old man with rheumatoid arthritis who had a painless left inguinal mass. Sonographic examination revealed a large soft tissue mass with mixed internal echotexture and regular borders extending inside the pelvis and into the proximal portion of the thigh. Sonography also showed communication between the bursa of the iliopsoas muscle and the hip cavity, with intra-articular synovitis and erosion of the ileum. Giant iliopsoas bursitis secondary to hip involvement in rheumatoid arthritis was diagnosed on the basis of the sonographic findings. This diagnosis was confirmed by MRI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Giant iliopsoas bursitis: Sonographic findings with magnetic resonance correlations

Bianchi

Martinoli

Keller

et al. 2002

J of Clinical Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although associated symptoms mainly derive from the compression of surrounding anatomical structures and the impairment of joint motion, the differences in size measured by US, CT and MR imaging were minor. We therefore think that this difference in ªperformanceº of the three cross-sectional imaging modalities is of no real significance when assessing iliopsoas bursitis; however, if exact and accurate data is needed, MRI is the method of choice, whereas US is probably the simplest, quickest, most cost-efficient imaging method to demonstrate an enlarged iliopsoas bursa, and to briefly assess the size and its effect on surrounding structures [2,3,4,6,7,9,10,14,16]. Furthermore, US alone allows dynamic assessment of compressive effects on surrounding structures and abnormal motion of muscles and tendons [2,3,4,6,7,9,10,14,16]; thus, some authors recommend US as the primary imaging modality in the assessment of palpable masses near the hip joint or in patients with painful hip joints and inconclusive conventional radiographs [4,7,10,16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaging features of iliopsoas bursitis

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was firstly to describe the spectrum of imaging findings seen in iliopsoas bursitis, and secondly to compare cross-sectional imaging techniques in the demonstration of the extent, size and appearance of the iliopsoas bursitis as referenced by surgery. Imaging studies of 18 patients (13 women, 5 men; mean age 53 years) with surgically proven iliopsoas bursitis were reviewed. All patients received conventional radiographs of the pelvis and hip, US and MR imaging of the hip. The CT was performed in 5 of the 18 patients. Ultrasound, CT and MR all demonstrated enlarged iliopsoas bursae. The bursal wall was thin and well defined in 83% and thickened in 17% of all cases. The two cases with septations on US were not seen by CT and MRI. A communication between the bursa and the hip joint was seen, and surgically verified, in all 18 patients by MR imaging, whereas US and CT failed to demonstrate it in 44 and 40% of the cases, respectively. Hip joint effusion was seen and verified by surgery in 16 patients by MRI, whereas CT (4 of 5) and US ( n=12) underestimated the number. The overall size of the bursa corresponded best between MRI and surgery, whereas CT and US tended to underestimate the size. Contrast enhancement of the bursal wall was seen in all cases. The imaging characteristics of iliopsoas bursitis are a well-defined, thin-walled cystic mass with a communication to the hip joint and peripheral contrast enhancement. The most accurate way to assess iliopsoas bursitis is with MR imaging; thus, it should be used for accurate therapy planning and follow-up studies. In order to initially prove an iliopsoas bursitis, US is the most cost-effective, easy-to-perform and fast alternative.

show abstract

“…It is generally 5-7 cm long and 2 -4 cm wide [1,3,7,8]. It normally extends from the inguinal ligament to the lesser trochanter [1,7,8], but in pathological conditions it can spread down to the knee and up to the false pelvis [7,10,12,14,18]. In an anatomical study of 206 cadavers, the bursa was found to connect with the hip in 15% of adults through an opening of from 1 mm to 3 cm wide [3].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pathological conditions of the iliopsoas bursa (also termed the iliopectineal, iliofemoral, iliac or subpsoas bursa) represent a little recognised cause of functional disability of the hip [1,4,7,9,10,17] and may be reported as due to overuse during sporting activities [7,14], osteoarthritis [1,7,10,11,14,15,18], septic arthritis [14], rheumatoid arthritis [2,8,13,14], synovial chondromatosis [13,14,18], pigmented villonodular synovitis [10, Offprint requests to: C. A. Manueddu Haemoglobin was normal; the white cell count was 10.8 × 109 with a normal differential count and a platelet count of 329 × 109. The sedimentation rate was 74 mm/h.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%