ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Primary cervical spinal myoepithelioma in an adolescent: a rare case report.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrimary spinal myoepithelioma is an exceedingly rare condition that frequently poses a diagnostic challenge due to its radiological similarity to other spinal tumors. Here, we report a rare case of primary cervical spinal myoepithelioma in an adolescent, emphasizing its diagnostic pitfalls and surgical management. CASE PRESENTATION: A 14-year-old male who presented with neck pain, left-hand numbness, and weakness, ultimately diagnosed with primary myoepithelioma of the cervical spine. The initial imaging studies, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT), demonstrated a well-defined, expansile, dumbbell-shaped mass in the cervical vertebra, with no evidence of vertebral body destruction. The patient underwent gross total resection via a posterior midline approach with C3-C5 stabilization. Histopathological and immunohistochemical analyses supported a diagnosis consistent with myoepithelioma, although the immunophenotype was not entirely typical. Postoperatively, neurological symptoms improved significantly, and no recurrence was observed during 20 months of follow-up.
conclusionsPrimary spinal myoepithelioma should be considered in the differential diagnosis of dumbbell-shaped spinal lesions, even in pediatric patients. While the immunophenotype may be atypical (S-100 negative), comprehensive immunohistochemical profiling and gross total resection are essential for an accurate diagnosis and favorable clinical outcome. This case highlights the diagnostic challenges of rare spinal tumors and underscores the importance of integrating imaging, surgical, and pathological findings.
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.