ReviewRomanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologie
Abdominal elastotic lesions. A clinicopathologic study of 23 cases.
Review in Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologie. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abdominal elastotic deposits are uncommon lesions that often presents as polyps. They show three histological patterns: fibroelastosis, angioelastosis, and elastofibroma. We describe 23 cases including rare locations, such as mesentery, greater omentum, hernia sac, spleen, peripancreatic fat, and hypodermal fat. The age of the patients ranged from 49 to 93 years (mean, 76.8 years). Most lesions were discovered incidentally in the microscopic study. The most frequent locations were peritoneal subserosa (43.5%) and mesentery∕mesocolon∕greater omentum (39.1%). The most common pattern was fibroelastosis (69.6%) followed by angioelastosis (26.1%). We observed one case of omental elastofibroma. A review of the 14 abdominal elastofibromas described including our case revealed that the age of the patients ranged from 45 to 88 years (mean, 68.5 years). Female predominance is striking (M:F, 1:12). The most common site was the stomach (50%). The greater omentum (14.3%), small intestine (7.1%), and pancreas (7.1%) are very rare sites for this lesion. Only one case before ours has been published in the greater omentum. The size of the lesions ranged from 0.7 cm to 8 cm (mean 3.2 cm). In 36.4% of the cases located in the digestive tract, the mucosa did not show alterations. Ulcerations (36.4%) or polypoid excrescences (18.2%) were mostly observed. Six (42.9%) cases were asymptomatic and six (42.9%) cases simulated a neoplasm. Two cases were associated with elastofibromas in other locations. Differential diagnosis includes amyloidoma, elastofibrolipoma, mesenteric elastic vascular sclerosis in neuroendocrine tumors, diverticular disease elastosis, pseudoxanthoma elasticum, pulse granuloma, and digestive lesions in patients treated with D-Penicillamine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.