Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsCase Report / SeriesPubMed

Cutaneous lipomatous neurofibroma.

Val-Bernal JF., de sa Dehesa J., Garijo MF., Val D.

Case Report / Series, published in Am J Dermatopathol (2002) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Case Report / Series
Journal
Am J Dermatopathol (2002)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
12140442
DOI
10.1097/00000372-200206000-00010

Abstract (original English)

We report a cutaneous lipomatous neurofibroma on the skin of the left-side parietal area of approximately 9 months' duration in a 67-year-old woman. The regular distribution of adipose tissue throughout the lesion suggested that fat was an integral part of the tumor, not a metaplastic or degenerative process. To our knowledge, this type of lesion has not been documented. The main differential diagnosis embraces neurocristic cutaneous hamartoma, lipoma and its variants, cutaneous meningioma, and neural nevus with fat replacement. We propose that lipomatous neurofibroma of the skin is caused by aberrant development of adipose tissue in a neurofibroma. The lesion originated as pluripotential neural crest cells after migration. This acquired lesion could arise from local stem cells. The old suggestion that neuroectoderm is capable of mesenchymal differentiation may be relevant to the histogenesis of this neoplasm.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
Adipose TissueAgedBiomarkers, TumorDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHamartomaHumansImmunohistochemistryLipomaMeningioma

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.