Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewPubMed

Cylindroma of head and neck: review of the literature and report of two rare cases.

Singh DD., Naujoks C., Depprich R., Schulte KW., Jankowiak F., Kübler NR.

Systematic Review on Face & Skin, published in J Craniomaxillofac Surg (2012) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • 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
Systematic Review
Journal
J Craniomaxillofac Surg (2012)
Country
Scotland
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
23260808
DOI
10.1016/j.jcms.2012.11.016

Abstract (original English)

Cylindromas are very rare and benign adnexal tumours of the skin. Very few reports of these benign tumours are reported in the literature. Dermal cylindromas are characterised as a benign neoplasm of the eccrine sweat glands. The most frequent location is the head and neck. Multiple occurrences are often linked to the Brooke-Spiegler syndrome. The Brooke-Spiegler syndrome is inherited as an irregular autosomal dominant trait. A malignant transformation to an adenoid cystic carcinoma is also described in the literature. The leading treatment modality described in the literature is the complete surgical removal of the lesions. Here, a systematic review of the literature is presented with two rare cases of cylindromas.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
AgedCarcinoma, Adenoid CysticDiagnosis, DifferentialFacial NeoplasmsFemaleHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplastic Syndromes, Hereditary

Browse all related research

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

Related research