Impact on Liver Cancer Treatment of a First Erroneous Diagnosis of Hemangioma

Portolani, Nazario; Baiocchi, Gian Luca; Gheza, Federico; Molfino, Sarah; Grazioli, Luigi; Olivetti, Lucio; Romanini, Laura; Frassi, Eleonora; Giulini, Stefano Maria

doi:10.1007/s00268-014-2643-7

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the misconception that a proper USG examination is adequate for the diagnosis of a hemangioma and further examination is unnecessary ( 16 , 17 ). Only 80 % of the liver hemangiomas have a typical appearance on USG ( 18 , 19 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, in the study by Portolani et al, 75% of the incorrect diagnoses were made at low volume centers. A high-volume center was “characterized by the availability of an interdisciplinary group for the management of liver disease, by a tertiary-level or an academic hospital, or by the certification of almost 40 liver resections per year” ( 16 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2- Even the most specific examination method may fail in rare situations ( 27 ), especially outside academic centers. The suggestion stated by Portolani et al ( 16 ) to repeat the imaging examination 4–6 months later is a practical safeguard.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Malignant Tumors Misdiagnosed as Liver Hemangiomas

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aim: To derive lessons from the data of patients who were followed for various periods with the misdiagnosis of liver hemangioma and eventually found to have a malignancy.Material and Methods: The records of 23 patients treated between 2003 and 2018 were analyzed retrospectively.Results: Twelve patients were men and 11 were women; median (range) age was 55 (35–80). The principal diagnostic modality for the initial diagnosis was ultrasonography (n:8), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (n:13), and computed tomography (CT) (n:2). At our institution, MRI was performed in 16 patients; the diagnosis was made with the available MRI and CT studies in five and two patients, respectively. In other words, the ultrasonography interpretations were not confirmed on MRI; in others, the MRI or CT examinations were of low quality or they had not been interpreted properly. Fifteen patients underwent surgery; the other patients received chemotherapy (n:6) or chemoembolization (n:2). The misdiagnosis caused a median (range) 10 (0–96) months delay in treatment. The final diagnoses were hepatocellular carcinoma in 12 patients, cholangiocarcinoma in four patients, metastatic mesenchymal tumor, metastasis of colon cancer, metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma, sarcomatoid hepatocellular carcinoma, angiosarcoma, thoracic wall tumor, and metastatic tumor of unknown primary in one patient each.Conclusions: High-quality MRI with proper interpretation and judicious follow up are vital for the accurate differential diagnosis of liver lesions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Malignant Tumors Misdiagnosed as Liver Hemangiomas

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11.2 ). a b Recently, Portolani et al [ 21 ] analyzed 28 patients with liver cancer who were observed after an initial erroneous diagnosis of hemangioma. The authors reported that the majority of the incorrect diagnoses (75 %) came from low volume center and occurred more frequently with the small nodules in chronic liver disease.…”

Section: Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%