Intramuscular Hemangioma of Lateral Rectus Muscle with Rare Presentation as an Epibulbar Mass: A Case Report and Review of Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Intramuscular hemangiomas of extraocular muscles are extremely rare tumors that usually present as retro-orbital masses causing proptosis. We describe a previously unreported presentation, in the form of an epibulbar mass; this easily accessible location allows direct imaging, complete surgical resection, and histopathological confirmation, providing a unique perspective. Case Presentation: A 69-year-old woman presented with a painless dark red mass in the lateral part of the right eye, which had been slowly enlarging over the last 18 months. Clinical features and imaging were suggestive of a benign vascular tumor of the conjunctiva. During surgical resection, the mass was observed to be enmeshed within the fibers of the lateral rectus muscle. Careful dissection from muscle fibers was needed for complete excision. Histopathology revealed the diagnosis of an intramuscular hemangioma of extraocular muscle. Conclusion: In this report, we describe the atypical anterior epibulbar presentation of intramuscular hemangioma of the lateral rectus muscle. We discuss the differential diagnoses and management of this rare tumor along with a review of existing literature. Careful surgical resection achieved complete resolution in this case without recurrence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".