case study 46

22
Case Study 46 Julia Kofler, M.D.

Upload: twyla

Post on 15-Jan-2016

50 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Case Study 46. Julia Kofler, M.D. Question 1. Clinical history: 29-year-old man who presented with a history of near syncopal episode, headache and mild ataxia. Describe the lesion on the following MRI scan. Question 1. T1 T1 with contrast. Answer. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Case Study 46

Case Study 46Julia Kofler, M.D.

Page 2: Case Study 46

Clinical history:

29-year-old man who presented with a history of near syncopal episode, headache and mild ataxia.

Describe the lesion on the following MRI scan.

Question 1

Page 3: Case Study 46

T1 T1 with contrast

Question 1

Page 4: Case Study 46

Minimally contrast-enhancing fourth ventricular mass.

Answer

Page 5: Case Study 46

Question 2What is your differential diagnosis based on the radiologic appearance and location of the lesion?

Page 6: Case Study 46

Answer Subependymoma

Ependymoma

Choroid plexus tumor

Pilocytic astrocytoma

Meningioma

Medulloblastoma

Page 7: Case Study 46

Question 3

Which of the tumors in your differential is least likely to be contrast-enhancing?

Page 8: Case Study 46

AnswerSubependymoma

Page 9: Case Study 46

Question 4

A resection of the tumor was performed. Describe the findings on the permanent section.

Click here to view slide.

Page 10: Case Study 46

Answer Clusters of tumor nuclei in a densely fibrillar

background with large anuclear areas

Mildly pleomorphic nuclei with inconspicuous nucleoli

Variable microcystic changes

Rare calcifications

Hyalinized vessels

Focal intratumoral hemorrhage

No mitoses are seen

Page 11: Case Study 46

Question 5

What is your diagnosis?

Page 12: Case Study 46

Answer

Subependymoma

Page 13: Case Study 46

Question 6

Subependymomas correspond to which WHO grade?

Page 14: Case Study 46

AnswerWHO grade 1

Page 15: Case Study 46

Question 7

Some differences with regard to dominant histologic features have been described for supratentorial and fourth ventricular subependymomas. Name some of these features.

Page 16: Case Study 46

Answer

Supratentorial subependymomas are more prone to microcystic change and are usually not calcified

Fourth ventricular subependymomas are commonly calcified and often lack microcystic change

Page 17: Case Study 46

Question 8Some subependymomas contain a component of ependymoma and are classified as mixed subependymoma/ependymoma.

How common are these mixed tumors?

Page 18: Case Study 46

Answer

About 5-20% of subependymomas have an ependymomatous component

Page 19: Case Study 46

Question 9

What is the prognostic significance of the ependymomatous component in mixed tumors?

Page 20: Case Study 46

Answer

Mixed tumors are graded based on the ependymoma component as WHO grade II or III neoplasms

Page 21: Case Study 46

Question 10

What is the immunohistochemical profile of subependymomas?

Page 22: Case Study 46

AnswerGFAP positive

S100 positive

Vimentin positive

Variable reactivity for neuronal markers of low specificity (NCAM, NSE)

Ki-67 labeling index usually <1%