↓ Skip to main content

Pulmonary sclerosing hemangioma presenting with dense spindle stroma cells: a potential diagnostic pitfall

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Pathology, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pulmonary sclerosing hemangioma presenting with dense spindle stroma cells: a potential diagnostic pitfall
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology, December 2012
DOI 10.1186/1746-1596-7-174
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xu-Yong Lin, Yan Wang, Chui-Feng Fan, Yang Liu, Juan-Han Yu, Shun-Dong Dai, Liang Wang, En-Hua Wang

Abstract

Pulmonary sclerosing hemangioma (PSH) is an uncommon pulmonary tumor. Histologically, PSH typically consists of two types of cells, surface cuboidal cells and polygonal cells, four architectural patterns including papillary, sclerotic, solid, and hemorrhagic. Herein, we present a case of PSH in a 59-year-old Chinese female. The tumor was predominantly composed of solid area presenting with diffuse spindle cells rather than polygonal cells. Focally, classical papillary and sclerotic area could be seen. Immunohistochemical staining showed that the spindle cells were positive for TTF-1, EMA, Actin(SM) and Vimentin, and negative for cytokeratin, cytokeratin7, cytokeratin5/6, surfactant apoprotein A, surfactant apoprotein B, CD34, CD99, S-100, HMB45, Desmin, Synaptophysin, CD56, ALK and Calretinin. The immunophenotype of the dense spindle cells in this case was similar to that of the polygonal cells, and thus the spindle cells may be the variants of polygonal cells. Based on morphologic features and the immunohistochemical profile, the tumor was diagnosed as a PSH. The significance of spindle cells change is unclear for us. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of PSH showing dense spindle cells in solid area. This case represents a potential diagnostic pitfall, as it may be misdiagnosed as a mesenchymal tumor such as inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor, synovial sarcoma, solitary fibrous tumor, leiomyoma, or even mesothelioma, especially if the specimen is limited or from fine- needle aspiration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Engineering 2 14%
Chemistry 2 14%
Computer Science 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2012.
All research outputs
#18,323,689
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#756
of 1,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,394
of 278,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#15
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,118 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,728 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.