Titlebook: Bone Tumors; A Practical Guide to Jim S. Wu,Mary G. Hochman Book 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Host142

,The First “Green” Space Technologies,ies. Determining which lesions require evaluation and which should be left alone can be a daunting process. On occasions, the imaging appearance is pathognomonic or highly suggestive of a specific entity; thus, imaging can play a determinative role in clinical management. Although the ultimate goal

Malcontent

,The First “Green” Space Technologies, instances, this is not possible. Nonetheless, one should aim to provide a short, logical differential diagnosis and to comment on whether the lesion can be left alone as a “do not touch” lesion or whether additional workup is necessary. The analysis should begin with the patient’s age and the locat

STING

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-131-3nd extent of the lesion for staging and treatment. In these respects, each imaging modality has characteristic strengths and weaknesses. Certain modalities highlight features of a lesion better than others, contributing to the accurate diagnosis. Radiographs continue to be the best imaging modality

河流

舊病復(fù)發(fā)

incarcerate

https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-12047-5ganization (WHO) groups fibrous bone lesions into two main categories: (1) fibrogenic and (2) fibrohistiocytic tumors. However, unlike the WHO classification, this chapter also includes fibrous dysplasia (FD) and fibrous xanthomas [fibrous cortical defects (FCD) and nonossifying fibromas (NOFs)]. Th

Gleason-score

comely

脆弱么

famine

A. bij de Vaate,R. Breukel,G. van der Veldehat were only briefly mentioned in prior chapters due to space constraints, but that can be important in the differential diagnosis for certain common lesions. Each case has a brief history followed by a description of the imaging findings. Next, we provide a “best 3” differential diagnosis list, ba