2023
DOI: 10.21037/med-22-15
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Extensive fibrosis in mediastinal seminoma is a diagnostic pitfall in small biopsies: two case reports

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, when the procedure was repeated, two of those patients were diagnosed with extensive necrotic cancer. It is therefore likely that the necrotic tissue interfered with obtaining a suitable sample during the first biopsy [29]. Curiously, 2 of the undiagnosed samples were taken with a 18G needle, which was used in only three patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, when the procedure was repeated, two of those patients were diagnosed with extensive necrotic cancer. It is therefore likely that the necrotic tissue interfered with obtaining a suitable sample during the first biopsy [29]. Curiously, 2 of the undiagnosed samples were taken with a 18G needle, which was used in only three patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some cases, single intermingled syncytiotrophoblasts can be present, causing elevated serum β‐hCG 63,86 . Prominent fibrosis as a sign of regression, well known in testicular GCT, 87 has only been described in few cases of PMGCTs with seminomatous components 88–90 …”
Section: Primary Mediastinal Seminomamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…63,86 Prominent fibrosis as a sign of regression, well known in testicular GCT, 87 has only been described in few cases of PMGCTs with seminomatous components. [88][89][90] Immunohistochemical markers for PMSEMs (Figure 1C-H) are SALL4, OCT3/4, SOX17 and CD117. 19,21,67,76 They are also positive for keratins, usually in a dot-like perinuclear staining pattern, which is different from testicular SEM.…”
Section: Histological Subtypesmentioning
confidence: 99%