2016
DOI: 10.1155/2016/6019501
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Case of Reactive Cervical Lymphadenopathy with Fat Necrosis Impinging on Adjacent Vascular Structures

Abstract: A tender neck mass in adults can be a diagnostic challenge due to a wide differential diagnosis, which ranges from reactive lymphadenopathy to malignancy. In this report, we describe a case of a young female with an unusually large and tender reactive lymph node with fat necrosis. The diagnostic imaging findings alone mimicked that of scrofula and malignancy, which prompted a complete workup. Additionally, the enlarged lymph node was compressing the internal jugular vein in the setting of oral contraceptive us… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 23 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The next most common cause for reactive lymphadenitis in the supraclavicular region is infectious, mainly viral, and hence, the cause could be an acute/subacute occult viral infection in the lung, with MLS being an important supporting factor. As a rule, swollen nodes other than supraclavicular/level V nodes usually result from reactive lymphadenopathy or infectious/viral lymphadenitis [ 9 ]. Although viral etiology was considered, there was no definite evidence of it.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The next most common cause for reactive lymphadenitis in the supraclavicular region is infectious, mainly viral, and hence, the cause could be an acute/subacute occult viral infection in the lung, with MLS being an important supporting factor. As a rule, swollen nodes other than supraclavicular/level V nodes usually result from reactive lymphadenopathy or infectious/viral lymphadenitis [ 9 ]. Although viral etiology was considered, there was no definite evidence of it.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%