Challenges of Preoperative Diagnosis and Management of Scalene Intramuscular Angioma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intramuscular angioma of scalene muscle is rare with only five cases reported so far. Four of them have not been suspected before surgery; one was diagnosed preoperatively by core biopsy. Preoperative diagnosis is important for management. Awareness of cytologic features could help preoperative diagnosis when need of ruling out malignancy and coagulopathy make fine needle aspiration a choice. We herein demonstrate a new case of a 27 year old male with history of hepatocellular carcinoma, who presented with a 6 cm left supraclavicular mass. The fine needle aspiration was paucicellular; however, the bland ovoid to spindle cells with a whirling and luminal arrangement in the background of blood, fatty drops and degenerate muscle are suggestive of intramuscular angioma. The magnetic resonance imagines (MRI) demonstrate a T1 isointense and T2 hyperintense ill-defined lesion splaying anterior and mid scalene muscles with subtle vascular voids at periphery. These features in combination with cytology findings indicate intramuscular angioma. The pre-operative findings are correlated to the histologic picture of mixed capillaries and varying sized venues intervening with fatty tissue and atrophic muscle. Intraoperatively, the mass is adjacent to the brachial plexus rootlets, interdigitating with the scalene muscle and pushing the carotid sheath, left subclavicular artery and vein aside. Following embolization, the mass is resected with minimal bleeding. Our case suggests that scalene intramuscular angioma can be successfully managed by surgery after embolization; preoperative diagnosis rendered by cytologic features and imaging characters would aid the planning of surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".