2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2017.04.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The utility of GLUT1 as a diagnostic marker in cutaneous vascular anomalies: A review of literature and recommendations for daily practice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
25
0
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
25
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This tool is considered as a helpful additional indicator for diagnosing HEM (3). However, this positive result is also possible for other vascular lesions, including epitheloid hemangioendotheliomas, angiosarcomas, and angiokeratomas; so, the final diagnosis for HEM should be made through the interpretation of all clinical and diagnostic features, and not based on GLUT-1 staining alone (6,39).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This tool is considered as a helpful additional indicator for diagnosing HEM (3). However, this positive result is also possible for other vascular lesions, including epitheloid hemangioendotheliomas, angiosarcomas, and angiokeratomas; so, the final diagnosis for HEM should be made through the interpretation of all clinical and diagnostic features, and not based on GLUT-1 staining alone (6,39).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…GLUT1 is a useful marker for differentiation of infantile hemangiomas and other vascular neoplasms such as congenital hemangioma, tufted angioma and kaposiform hemangioendothelioma, being positive in the infantile hemangiomas and negative in the other entities [ 24 ]. A recent research highlighted that complete cases of microvenular hemangioma (n = 9) and congenital hemangiomas (n = 16) were found to be devoid of GLUT1 expression [ 25 ]. In a study, the positivity of GLUT1 was described in complete specimens with verrucous hemangioma, which was negative in our study [ 3 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three paired samples were used, including tumor of proliferative IHs (abbreviated as T) and the normal tissues adjacent to but farther than 1 cm from the outermost edge of the tumors (abbreviated as S). The tumors were divided into two parts after excision: one part was flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen for subsequent experiments, and the other part was paraffin-embedded and sectioned for hematoxylin and eosin and immunohistochemical staining for glucose transporter 1 [16]. The tumors were reconfirmed by pathological examination (Figure 1), and the normal tissues were confirmed to be free of tumor invasion.…”
Section: Samplesmentioning
confidence: 99%