共1页/20条首页上一页1下一页尾页
回复:20 阅读:2287
左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)

byq 离线

帖子:845
粉蓝豆:129
经验:3229
注册时间:2006-09-25
加关注  |  发消息
楼主 发表于 2009-02-20 12:24|举报|关注(0)
浏览排序[ 顺序 逆序 楼主 支持 精彩 ]  快捷回复
姓    名: ××× 性别:  女 年龄:  13岁
标本名称:  脑肿瘤
简要病史:  头痛1天伴意识障碍入院。
肉眼检查:  
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图1
    图1
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图2
    图2
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图3
    图3
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图4
    图4
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图5
    图5
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图6
    图6
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图7
    图7
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图8
    图8
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图9
    图9
  • 左颞顶额叶肿瘤(090843)图10
    图10
标签:
本帖最后由 于 2009-02-20 13:15:00 编辑
0
添加参考诊断
×参考诊断
  

byq 离线

帖子:845
粉蓝豆:129
经验:3229
注册时间:2006-09-25
加关注  |  发消息
1 楼    发表于2009-02-20 13:16:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-02-20 13:18:00 编辑  GFAP阳性,LCA阴性,目前考虑星形母细胞瘤不知是否合适,还需要做哪些工作?请各位老师发言。谢谢!
0
回复

sjp 离线

帖子:954
粉蓝豆:552
经验:965
注册时间:2008-04-28
加关注  |  发消息
2 楼    发表于2009-02-20 13:33:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 星形细胞瘤WHO2级.
0
回复

wang4160 离线

帖子:2256
粉蓝豆:16
经验:2617
注册时间:2007-01-31
加关注  |  发消息
3 楼    发表于2009-02-20 21:20:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复

 曾经看过一例星形母,但是层次好像没这么多,而且没有这么连片,但是其他的诊断似乎又不合适!

另外,前半部分肿瘤呈乳头状,后半部分,血管呈分支鹿角状,细胞稀疏!

加做:SYN、NSE、olig2

0
回复

mjma 离线

帖子:703
粉蓝豆:24
经验:789
注册时间:2006-09-28
加关注  |  发消息
4 楼    发表于2009-02-23 01:26:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-02-23 01:27:00 编辑 There are hypercellularity, focal tumor necrosis, and marked nuclear atypia consistent with a malignant neoplasm. The differential diagnoses for this "small blue cell malignancy" found in the cerebrum of a 13 year old child include (1) supratentorial primitive neuroectodernal tumor (PNET), (2) atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (AT/RT), (3) small cell variant of glioblastoma, (4) lymphom, and (5) anaplastic ependymoma. I do not see any feature (perivascular pseudorosettes, ependymal canals, perinuclear halos) suggestive of ependymal differentiation, so (5) is unlikely. LCA is reportedly negative, so (4) is unlikely. GFAP is reportedly positive, but I would like to see the extent (% of cells) and intensity of positive staining. PNET may have some cells that are GFAP-positive, while small cell glioblastoma may show only few GFAP-positive cells. To further characterize the malignancy, I suggest the following immunohistochemical stains - synaptophysin, NSE, EMA, and smooth muscle actin. I will wait for these results before making a final diagnosis.
0
回复
signature

聞道有先後,術業有專攻

byq 离线

帖子:845
粉蓝豆:129
经验:3229
注册时间:2006-09-25
加关注  |  发消息
5 楼    发表于2009-02-23 08:37:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-02-23 08:38:00 编辑  谢谢马老师和楼上各位老师,IHC除了GFAP(+),Ki-67(+)>90%,EMA(-)Syna(-),请看图片。(不好意思,今天才看到马老师的回复,NSE和SMA暂时没做,下一步补做)

名称:图1
描述:图1

名称:图2
描述:图2

名称:图3
描述:图3

名称:图4
描述:图4
0
回复

fyshan 离线

帖子:910
粉蓝豆:0
经验:968
注册时间:2006-10-04
加关注  |  发消息
6 楼    发表于2009-02-23 10:23:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 Agree with Dr. Ma
0
回复

fuying 离线

帖子:362
粉蓝豆:2
经验:390
注册时间:2008-04-10
加关注  |  发消息
7 楼    发表于2009-02-23 11:32:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
以下是引用mjma在2009-2-23 1:26:00的发言:

There are hypercellularity, focal tumor necrosis, and marked nuclear atypia consistent with a malignant neoplasm. The differential diagnoses for this "small blue cell malignancy" found in the cerebrum of a 13 year old child include (1) supratentorial primitive neuroectodernal tumor (PNET), (2) atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (AT/RT), (3) small cell variant of glioblastoma, (4) lymphom, and (5) anaplastic ependymoma. I do not see any feature (perivascular pseudorosettes, ependymal canals, perinuclear halos) suggestive of ependymal differentiation, so (5) is unlikely. LCA is reportedly negative, so (4) is unlikely. GFAP is reportedly positive, but I would like to see the extent (% of cells) and intensity of positive staining. PNET may have some cells that are GFAP-positive, while small cell glioblastoma may show only few GFAP-positive cells. To further characterize the malignancy, I suggest the following immunohistochemical stains - synaptophysin, NSE, EMA, and smooth muscle actin. I will wait for these results before making a final diagnosis.

THANKS,分析很全面,学习了。
0
回复

yourself 离线

帖子:663
粉蓝豆:7129
经验:691
注册时间:2007-06-30
加关注  |  发消息
8 楼    发表于2009-02-23 22:24:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 小细胞型胶质母细胞瘤,从发病年龄、部位及组织形态都比较符合。
1

GQQ
回复

byq 离线

帖子:845
粉蓝豆:129
经验:3229
注册时间:2006-09-25
加关注  |  发消息
9 楼    发表于2009-02-24 14:23:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-02-24 14:31:00 编辑  续免疫组化图片
  • 图1
  • 图2
  • 图3
  • 图4
0
回复

mjma 离线

帖子:703
粉蓝豆:24
经验:789
注册时间:2006-09-28
加关注  |  发消息
10 楼    发表于2009-02-25 11:11:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-02-25 11:13:00 编辑 The high MIB-1 labeling index is consistent with a malignant neoplasm - not a surprise. I am not very familiar with the practical use of CD99 and olig2. NSE and synaptophysin both appear negative, making PNET unlikely. SMA appears negative, making AT/RT unlikely. GFAP appears positive and EMA appears negative, but I would like to see high-power (400x) view of these to make sure GFAP immunoreactivity is not background staining and no paranuclear, dot-like EMA immunoreactivity is seen. If GFAP is truly positive and EMA truly negative, this would fit the diagnosis of WHO grade IV glioblastoma of the small cell variant.
0
回复
signature

聞道有先後,術業有專攻

byq 离线

帖子:845
粉蓝豆:129
经验:3229
注册时间:2006-09-25
加关注  |  发消息
11 楼    发表于2009-02-25 18:55:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 回马老师,GFAP是真正的阳性而不是背景着色,EMA确实(-),如果诊断小细胞性胶质母细胞瘤WHOⅣ级,olig2阳性可以解释吗?
0
回复

mjma 离线

帖子:703
粉蓝豆:24
经验:789
注册时间:2006-09-28
加关注  |  发消息
12 楼    发表于2009-03-02 11:26:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
I have little experience with olig2 stain, so cannot comment on the significance of its positive staining in this case. I do not see features characteristic of oligodendroglioma, so would still favor WHO grade IV glioblastoma, small cell variant. The most difficult differential diagnosis in this young patient would be PNET, but negative staining of NSE and synaptophysin pretty much rule it out.
0
回复
signature

聞道有先後,術業有專攻

yourself 离线

帖子:663
粉蓝豆:7129
经验:691
注册时间:2007-06-30
加关注  |  发消息
13 楼    发表于2009-03-02 21:20:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 olig2在脑肿瘤中并非少枝胶质细胞瘤所特异的标记物,其他星形细胞瘤、胶质母细胞瘤均可表达,室管膜瘤偶尔散在表达,因此 olig2可用来鉴别室管膜瘤与其他星形细胞瘤。
0
回复

catcat 离线

帖子:1187
粉蓝豆:0
经验:2103
注册时间:2008-07-10
加关注  |  发消息
14 楼    发表于2009-03-06 11:41:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 
  The high MIB-1 labeling index is consistent with a malignant neoplasm - not a surprise. I am not very familiar with the practical use of CD99 and olig2. NSE and synaptophysin both appear negative, making PNET unlikely. SMA appears negative, making AT/RT unlikely. GFAP appears positive and EMA appears negative, but I would like to see high-power (400x) view of these to make sure GFAP immunoreactivity is not background staining and no paranuclear, dot-like EMA immunoreactivity is seen. If GFAP is truly positive and EMA truly negative, this would fit the diagnosis of WHO grade IV glioblastoma of the small cell variant.

学习
0
回复

byq 离线

帖子:845
粉蓝豆:129
经验:3229
注册时间:2006-09-25
加关注  |  发消息
15 楼    发表于2009-03-08 17:56:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 谢谢马老师和其他各位老师。
0
回复

刻苦学习 离线

帖子:116
粉蓝豆:6
经验:122
注册时间:2008-12-22
加关注  |  发消息
16 楼    发表于2009-03-26 20:21:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复

学习拉,好病理

0
回复

zhang197510 离线

帖子:409
粉蓝豆:2971
经验:448
注册时间:2009-03-22
加关注  |  发消息
17 楼    发表于2009-04-15 20:20:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 学习
0
回复
signature
坚持就是胜利!!

liangjinjun 离线

帖子:2328
粉蓝豆:2
经验:2457
注册时间:2007-08-07
加关注  |  发消息
18 楼    发表于2009-05-05 22:12:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 学习
0
回复
signature
梁晋军

zzz333858 离线

帖子:155
粉蓝豆:2
经验:158
注册时间:2008-04-16
加关注  |  发消息
19 楼    发表于2009-05-05 22:55:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 学习了,好像看免疫组化只能考虑小细胞性胶质母细胞瘤了
0
回复

潇潇 离线

帖子:1008
粉蓝豆:7
经验:1008
注册时间:2009-02-25
加关注  |  发消息
20 楼    发表于2009-05-05 22:59:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 好病例,学习
0
回复
回复:20 阅读:2287
共1页/20条首页上一页1下一页尾页
【免责声明】讨论内容仅作学术交流之用,不作为诊疗依据,由此而引起的法律问题作者及本站不承担任何责任。
快速回复
进入高级回复
您最多可输入10000个汉字,按 "Ctrl" + "Enter" 直接发送
搜索回复/乘电梯 ×
按内容
按会员
乘电梯
合作伙伴
友情链接