Datasets:

---

Recag

/

Rp_CommonC_502

like 0

ERROR: type should be string, got "https://profreg.medscape.com/px/getpracticeprofile.do?method=getProfessionalProfile&urlCache=aHR0cHM6Ly9lbWVkaWNpbmUubWVkc2NhcGUuY29tL2FydGljbGUvMzkxMjcyLW92ZXJ2aWV3\nDrugs & Diseases > Radiology\nLiposarcoma Imaging\nAuthor: Ali Nawaz Khan, MBBS, FRCS, FRCP, FRCR; Chief Editor: Felix S Chew, MD, MBA, MEd more...\nSections Liposarcoma Imaging\nNuclear Imaging\nLiposarcoma is a malignant tumor of mesenchymal origin in which the bulk of the tumor differentiates into adipose tissue. Liposarcoma is a common neoplasm of the soft tissues and affects middle-aged patients. Commonly affected sites include the thigh, gluteal region, retroperitoneum, leg, and shoulder area. Liposarcomas rarely arise from a preexisting lipoma. The clinical presentation depends on the site of the tumors, most of which are palpable masses. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]\nLiposarcomas and lipomas may present with similar symptomatology, as well as similar clinical and imaging findings. Only approximately 15% of soft-tissue sarcomas are liposarcomas, and liposarcomas represent less than 1% of all malignant tumors. [1, 2, 3, 4]\nIn general, the more aggressive tumors demonstrate more radiopacity, whereas well-differentiated tumors have a greater fat content. Liposarcomas are the most radiosensitive soft-tissue tumors.\nWell-differentiated tumors are easily characterized as fat-containing masses, although differentiation between a malignant tumor and a benign one may not be possible. Poorly differentiated tumors may be indistinguishable from other mesothelial tumors, lymphomas, metastases, and inflammatory masses.\nPreferred examination\nComputed tomography (CT) scanning plays an important role in the preoperative evaluation of lipomatous and myxoid tumors of the soft tissue. [7] Besides providing valuable morphologic information, CT scan findings help differente between various types of lipomatous tumors. Well-differentiated liposarcomas may be distinguished from other types of tumors on the basis of their largely lipomatous appearance. [5] Malignant fibrous histiocytoma, leiomyosarcoma, and desmoid tumors may have a CT scan appearance that is indistinguishable from that of liposarcoma, particularly liposarcoma of the myxoid, mixed myxoid and round cell, round cell, or pleomorphic type.\nGadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is important in differentiating myxoid liposarcomas from benign cystic tumors. In an MRI study of patients with high-grade myxoid liposarcomas, all high-grade lesions had lipid signal, a peritumoral capsule, and pertumoral contrast enhancement. The strongest indicator was a size of 10 cm or more. [8, 9] Because myxoid tissue is present in many benign and malignant tumors, MRI may not enable a specific diagnosis of a liposarcoma. Moreover, any lesion consisting of edema, an extracellular matrix with a high level of mucopolysaccharide, hyaline cartilage content, and necrosis may appear cystic on MRI scans. [10, 11]\nFindings on plain radiographs are nonspecific, and the modality usually offers little except perhaps aid in confirming the presence of a soft-tissue mass. Frequently, fat is not detectable radiologically. Ultrasonography is helpful in confirming the presence of a mass when doubt exists. The use of radionuclides has been anecdotal, but imaging with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) scanning holds promise. [12, 13]\n(The radiologic characteristics of liposarcomas are demonstrated in the images below.)\nComputed tomography (CT) scan of a left thigh shows a huge mass (arrows) with predominant fat attenuation. The central soft-tissue component (asterisk) and thick, internal septations are consistent with liposarcoma.\nView Media Gallery\nA 67-year-old man presented with a slowly growing mass on the left side of his groin and with mild left leg claudication. The patient was a nonsmoker and was not diabetic. T1-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) shows a 5-cm, low–signal-intensity, lobulated mass in the left upper thigh.\nMagnetic resonance (MR) angiogram of the leg vessels in a 67-year-old man who presented with a slowly growing mass on the left side of his groin and with mild left leg claudication. The image shows medial displacement and compression of the left femoral artery, superficial femoral artery, and profunda by the tumor, which resulted in the claudication.\nThe sensitivity and specificity of radiographs are low for liposarcomas. Inflammatory masses and other types of benign and malignant tumors can have a similar appearance. Radiographic findings are seldom diagnostic, and the images may demonstrate a nonspecific soft-tissue mass. Frequently, no fat is detectable. Rarely, calcification (seen in the image below) is present.\nAbdominal radiographs in patients with retroperitoneal tumors may reveal a soft-tissue–displacing, gas-filled structure and effacement of the normal fat planes. Contrast-enhanced studies of the gastrointestinal tract may show displacement of the stomach, small bowel, or colon, depending on the location of the tumor.\nIntravenous urography may show renal or ureteric displacement; rarely, hydronephrosis is demonstrated.\nA plain radiograph of a left femur demonstrates a large, soft-tissue mass projected over the medial aspect of the thigh (arrowheads). Small areas of radiolucency (asterisk) and calcification (arrow) are shown.\nCT scans demonstrate 3 distinct patterns in liposarcomas, as follows:\nAn enhancing, solid, inhomogeneous, poorly defined, infiltrating mass\nA mixed-pattern tumor with foci of fat interspersed in high-attenuating tissue\nA pseudocystic water-density tumor.\nCT scanning plays an important role in the preoperative evaluation of lipomatous and myxoid tumors of the soft tissue. [14, 15] Besides providing valuable morphologic information, CT scanning helps differentiate between various types of lipomatous tumors. [16, 17] CT scanning is useful in the determination of the tumoral response to radiation therapy or chemotherapy; it is also invaluable in the detection of tumor recurrence. Malignant fibrous histiocytoma, leiomyosarcoma, and desmoid tumors may have an appearance that is indistinguishable from that of liposarcoma, particularly liposarcoma of the myxoid, mixed myxoid and round cell, round cell, or pleomorphic type.\nLiposarcomas of the myxoid type, the mixed myxoid and round cell type, the round cell type, and the pleomorphic type are usually poorly defined, with attenuation values of 12-38 HU and varying degrees of contrast enhancement. [18, 19] Calcification is detectable in as many as 12% of the tumors.\nOccasionally, the mass may appear inhomogeneous, with areas of low-attenuating, fatty components. [20, 21] Fatty components may be demonstrated better with planar tomography.\n(The CT-scan characteristics of liposarcomas are demonstrated below.)\nA 50-year-old man presented with a 6-month history of a dull ache over the right hypochondrium. An ultrasonogram (not shown) depicted a poorly defined, infiltrating, echogenic mass in the right hepatic lobe with shadowing. A nonenhanced, axial computed tomography (CT) scan shows a low–fat-attenuating mass under the diaphragm; the mass displaces the liver to the left.\nContrast-enhanced, axial computed tomography (CT) scan of an abdomen demonstrates a huge, intra-abdominal, fatty mass with a soft-tissue component (arrow) and thick septations. The mass displaces the descending colon and the left kidney posteriorly.\nMost liposarcomas appear well defined on MRI scans, mostly with lobulated margins. [22, 23, 8, 24] Well-differentiated liposarcomas are made up primarily of fat and have septations or nodules; these neoplasms are hyperintense on T2-weighted images. [18, 25, 26] After the administration of contrast material, well-differentiated liposarcomas may enhance minimally or not at all. [10, 11] (See the images below.)\nA spectrum of abnormal MRI findings may occur in the myxoid type, depending on the quantity of fat and myxoid material that is present, on the degree of cellularity and vascularity, and on whether or not necrosis exists. [27] Most myxoid tumors have linear or lacy, amorphous foci of fat. [28] Some myxoid tumors may appear cystic on nonenhanced MRI scans, but they are usually enhancing after the administration of contrast agents. [29, 9]\nPleomorphic tumors show a markedly heterogeneous internal structure and moderate contrast enhancement. The malignancy grade is believed to increase in parallel with tumor heterogeneity and contrast enhancement.\nT2-weighted, coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan of the left upper thigh in a 67-year-old man who presented with a slowly growing mass on the left side of his groin and with mild left leg claudication. The image shows a high–signal-intensity, lobulated, septate mass in the region of the groin.\nContrast-enhanced, axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan of the upper thigh in a 67-year-old man who presented with a slowly growing mass on the left side of his groin and with mild left leg claudication. The image shows fairly intense tumor enhancement.\nShort-tau inversion recovery, turbo spin-echo, axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan of the left upper thigh in a 67-year-old man who presented with a slowly growing mass on the left side of his groin and with mild left leg claudication. The image shows fluid signal intensity within the tumor.\nSagittal, T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan in a 32-year-old woman presenting with a palpable mass above the left popliteal fossa. The image shows a low–signal-intensity, lobulated mass in the region of the Hunter canal.\nAxial, T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan in a 32-year-old woman obtained through a palpable mass above the left popliteal fossa. The image shows a low–signal-intensity, lobulated mass.\nAxial, T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan in a 32-year-old woman presenting with a palpable mass above the left popliteal fossa. The image shows a high–signal-intensity, lobulated mass.\nFat-saturated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan through the tumor in a 32-year-old woman presenting with a palpable mass above the left popliteal fossa. The image shows fluid signal intensity within the mass.\nMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans (coronal, T1-weighted image and axial, T1-weighted image with fat saturation) show a soft-tissue mass of the posterior aspect of a thigh. It has a predominantly low T1 signal intensity except in its inferior portion, which has a high T1 signal intensity isointense to subcutaneous fat. Complete suppression is shown on the axial, T1-weighted image with fat saturation (asterisk).\nWell-differentiated liposarcomas may be distinguished from other types of tumors on the basis of their largely lipomatous appearance. [30, 31] Gadolinium-enhanced imaging is important in differentiating myxoid liposarcomas from benign cystic tumors.\nGadolinium-based contrast agents have been linked to the development of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) or nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy (NFD). For more information, see Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis. The disease has occurred in patients with moderate to end-stage renal disease after being given a gadolinium-based contrast agent to enhance MRI or magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) scans. NSF/NFD is a debilitating and sometimes fatal disease. Characteristics include red or dark patches on the skin; burning, itching, swelling, hardening, and tightening of the skin; yellow spots on the whites of the eyes; joint stiffness with trouble moving or straightening the arms, hands, legs, or feet; pain deep in the hip bones or ribs; and muscle weakness. For more information, see Medscape.\nMyxoid tissue is present in many benign and malignant tumors, including extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcomas, intramuscular myxomas, ganglia, and myxoid, malignant fibrous histiocytomas, in addition to myxoid liposarcomas. Any lesion consisting of edema, an extracellular matrix with a high level of mucopolysaccharide, hyaline cartilage content, and necrosis may appear cystic on MRI scans.\nUltrasonography is helpful in confirming the presence of a mass. [32, 33] Liposarcomas are usually hyperechoic. Retroperitoneal liposarcomas are highly reflective, although this feature may be absent when the tumor is poorly differentiated.\nThe finding of a solid retroperitoneal mass that demonstrates a heterogeneous echo pattern with an echo-poor center usually suggests a sarcoma. The central echo-poor area is usually the result of hemorrhage or necrosis (because the tumors tend to outgrow their blood supply).\nA well-differentiated, peripheral liposarcoma is usually hyperechoic and may be indistinguishable from a lipoma; however, Doppler ultrasonography studies reveal that a liposarcoma is more vascular than a lipoma. [34]\nThe remaining 3 varieties of liposarcoma appear as a heterogeneous soft-tissue mass with no distinguishing characteristics.\nConfirming the retroperitoneal origin of a tumor is not always possible with ultrasonography. However, some characteristic features may be helpful in locating the tumor's origin. These include anterior displacement of the pancreas, abdominal aorta, inferior vena cava, kidneys, and ascending or descending colon. The benign or malignant nature of retroperitoneal tumors cannot be determined by using ultrasonography.\nVascular tumors, such as hemangiopericytomas, can be highly reflective, presumably because of the numerous tissue interfaces with multiple vascular walls. Distinguishing poorly differentiated liposarcomas from other types of retroperitoneal or peripheral masses is not always possible. A peripheral, well-differentiated liposarcoma may have the appearance of a lipoma.\nIt appears that gallium-67 (67Ga) scanning can play an important part in the evaluation of patients presenting with a primary or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, according to a study by Imaeda et al. In the investigation, 67Ga citrate scintigraphy scanning was evaluated in 90 patients with soft-tissue tumors of the limbs. Positive findings were found in 78% of patients with malignant tumors, 25% of patients with benign lesions, and 31% of patients with other types of lesions. Distinguishing liposarcoma from lipoma appeared to be possible by means of a 67Ga scan, according to the authors. [35]\nGallium-67 scanning may also have a role in imaging liposarcoma recurrence. [36]\nA study of 78 patients with malignant soft-tissue sarcoma who were evaluated with thallium-201 (201Tl) chloride revealed a radionuclide sensitivity of 81%. [37] Another study showed that technetium-99m (99mTc) pertechnetate can potentially aid in the localization of malignant soft-tissue tumors and may be useful in their evaluation. [38, 39] Another study demonstrated that 99mTc bleomycin and 99mTc pentavalent dimercaptosuccinic acid (99mTc[V]-DMSA) scanning can better localize liposarcomas than 67Ga imaging. [40]\nVertebral metastases from a myxoid liposarcoma may not show radionuclide uptake on isotope bone scans and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scanning, even when extraskeletal extensions are present. Similarly, even a fractured vertebra may not always be visible on FDG-PET scans. [41]\nAngiography may be useful for preoperative planning, intra-arterial infusion, and/or transcatheter embolization. Liposarcomas are usually hypovascular to moderately vascular, and they displace major vessels, particularly the inferior vena cava. [42] Moderately hypervascular liposarcomas may show irregular, fine tumor vessels and areas of tumor stain (as shown in the images below). Venous filling may occur early, and the veins may be dilated and tortuous. Displacement of the kidneys and arteries is seen in all except very small retroperitoneal tumors.\nAngiography cannot help in the differentiation of liposarcomas from other types of sarcomas. Benign and malignant retroperitoneal tumors can be avascular.\nModerately hypervascular tumor in the right upper thigh shows irregular, fine tumor vessels and areas of tumor stain.\nWhat is liposarcoma?\nWhat are the preferred modalities for liposarcoma imaging?\nWhat are limitations of liposarcoma imaging?\nWhich radiography findings are characteristic of liposarcoma?\nWhich findings on CT scans are characteristic of liposarcoma?\nWhat is the degree of confidence for CT scanning of liposarcoma?\nWhich conditions may create false positive or negative findings on CT scans of liposarcomas?\nWhich MRI findings are characteristic of liposarcoma?\nWhat is the degree of confidence for MRI of liposarcoma?\nWhich conditions may create false positive or negative findings on MRIs of liposarcomas?\nWhat is the role of ultrasonography in liposarcoma imaging?\nWhat is the degree of confidence for ultrasonography of liposarcoma?\nWhich conditions may create false positive or negative findings on ultrasonography of liposarcomas?\nWhat is the role of nuclear imaging in liposarcoma imaging?\nWhat is the role of angiography in liposarcoma imaging?\nPisani M, Al-Buheissi S, Whittlestone T. Retroperitoneal liposarcomas: a representative literature review occasioned by a rare case of laterelapse abdominal liposarcoma. Urologia. 2015 Sep 1. [Medline].\nNagano S, Yokouchi M, Setoguchi T, Ishidou Y, Sasaki H, Shimada H, et al. Differentiation of lipoma and atypical lipomatous tumor by a scoring system: implication of increased vascularity on pathogenesis of liposarcoma. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015 Feb 22. 16:36. [Medline].\nKodiyan J, Rudman JR, Rosow DE, Thomas GR. Lipoma and liposarcoma of the larynx: case reports and literature review. Am J Otolaryngol. 2015 Jul-Aug. 36 (4):611-5. [Medline].\nCrisan N, Ivan CS, Bungardean C, Cebotaru C, Coman I. Retroperitoneal perirenal myxoid liposarcoma. J Surg Case Rep. 2015 Mar 5. 2015 (3):[Medline].\nBestic JM, Kransdorf MJ, White LM, Bridges MD, Murphey MD, Peterson JJ, et al. Sclerosing variant of well-differentiated liposarcoma: relative prevalence and spectrum of CT and MRI features. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Jul. 201 (1):154-61. [Medline].\nThway K. Well-differentiated liposarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma: An updated review. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2019 Mar. 36 (2):112-121. [Medline].\nCrone-Munzebrock W, Baake S, Thoma G, et al. Comparison of computed tomography and digital subtraction angiography of preoperative evaluation of soft-tissue tumors of the limbs. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1985. 104(5):319-24. [Medline].\nGimber LH, Montgomery EA, Morris CD, Krupinski EA, Fayad LM. MRI characteristics associated with high-grade myxoid liposarcoma. Clin Radiol. 2017 Feb 27. [Medline].\nLöwenthal D, Zeile M, Niederhagen M, Fehlberg S, Schnapauff D, Pink D, et al. Differentiation of myxoid liposarcoma by magnetic resonance imaging: a histopathologic correlation. Acta Radiol. 2014 Oct. 55 (8):952-60. [Medline].\nYun JS, Chung HW, Song JS, Lee SH, Lee MH, Shin MJ. Dedifferentiated liposarcoma of the musculoskeletal system: expanded MR imaging spectrum from predominant fatty mass to non-fatty mass. Acta Radiol. 2019 Mar 24. 284185119833060. [Medline].\nGorelik N, Reddy SMV, Turcotte RE, Goulding K, Jung S, Alcindor T, et al. Early detection of metastases using whole-body MRI for initial staging and routine follow-up of myxoid liposarcoma. Skeletal Radiol. 2018 Mar. 47 (3):369-379. [Medline].\nKern KA, Brunetti A, Norton JA, et al. Metabolic imaging of human extremity musculoskeletal tumors by PET. J Nucl Med. 1988 Feb. 29(2):181-6. [Medline]. [Full Text].\nOkazumi S, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Schwarzbach MH, Strauss LG. Quantitative, dynamic 18F-FDG-PET for the evaluation of soft tissue sarcomas: relation to differential diagnosis, tumor grading and prediction of prognosis. Hell J Nucl Med. 2009 Sep-Dec. 12(3):223-8. [Medline].\nLevine E. Computed tomography of musculoskeletal tumors. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging. 1981. 16(4):279-309. [Medline].\nNoble JL, Moskovic E, Fisher C, Judson I. Imaging of skeletal metastases in myxoid liposarcoma. Sarcoma. 2010. 2010:262361. [Medline]. [Full Text].\nWang LJ, Wong YC, Chen CJ, et al. Computerized tomography characteristics that differentiate angiomyolipomas from liposarcomas in the perinephric space. J Urol. 2002 Feb. 167(2 Pt 1):490-3. [Medline].\nEgund N, Ekelund L, Sako M, et al. CT of soft-tissue tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981 Oct. 137(4):725-9. [Medline]. [Full Text].\nKim T, Murakami T, Oi H, et al. CT and MR imaging of abdominal liposarcoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996 Apr. 166(4):829-33. [Medline]. [Full Text].\nLindahl S, Markhede G, Berlin O. Computed tomography of lipomatous and myxoid tumors. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1985 Nov-Dec. 26(6):709-13. [Medline].\nColeman BG, Mulhern CB, Arger PH, et al. New observations of soft tissue sarcomas with contrast medium-enhanced computed tomography. J Comput Tomogr. 1985 Jul. 9(3):187-93. [Medline].\nHunter JC, Johnston WH, Genant HK. Computed tomography evaluation of fatty tumors of the somatic soft tissues: clinical utility and radiologic-pathologic correlation. Skeletal Radiol. 1979 Jun 6. 4(2):79-91. [Medline].\nWatt AJ, McMillan N. Multiple symmetric lipomatosis--MR appearances. Clin Radiol. 1999 Nov. 54(11):778-80. [Medline].\nKind M, Stock N, Coindre JM. Histology and imaging of soft tissue sarcomas. Eur J Radiol. 2009 Oct. 72(1):6-15. [Medline].\nStevenson JD, Watson JJ, Cool P, Cribb GL, Jenkins JP, Leahy M, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in myxoid liposarcoma: A useful adjunct for the detection of extra-pulmonary metastatic disease. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Apr. 42 (4):574-80. [Medline].\nArkun R, Memis A, Akalin T, et al. Liposarcoma of soft tissue: MRI findings with pathologic correlation. Skeletal Radiol. 1997 Mar. 26(3):167-72. [Medline].\nKumagai K, Tomita M, Nozaki Y, Sugiyama K, Abe K, Uetani M. MRI findings of an inflammatory variant of well-differentiated liposarcoma. Skeletal Radiol. 2010 May. 39(5):491-4. [Medline].\nSung MS, Kang HS, Suh JS, et al. Myxoid liposarcoma: appearance at MR imaging with histologic correlation. Radiographics. 2000 Jul-Aug. 20(4):1007-19. [Medline]. [Full Text].\nMatsumoto K, Takada M, Okabe H, et al. Foci of signal intensities different from fat in well-differentiated liposarcoma and lipoma: correlation between MR and histological findings. Clin Imaging. 2000 Jan-Feb. 24(1):38-43. [Medline].\nElsayes KM, Staveteig PT, Narra VR, et al. Retroperitoneal masses: magnetic resonance imaging findings with pathologic correlation. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2007 May-Jun. 36(3):97-106. [Medline].\nKransdorf MJ, Jelinek JS, Moser RP Jr, et al. Soft-tissue masses: diagnosis using MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989 Sep. 153(3):541-7. [Medline]. [Full Text].\nJaovisidha S, Suvikapakornkul Y, Woratanarat P, Subhadrabandhu T, Nartthanarung A, Siriwongpairat P. MR imaging of fat-containing tumours: the distinction between lipoma and liposarcoma. Singapore Med J. 2010 May. 51(5):418-23. [Medline].\nBowie JD, Bernstein JR. Retroperitoneal fibrosis: ultrasound findings and case report. J Clin Ultrasound. 1976 Dec. 4(6):435-7. [Medline].\nUlivi M, Leonardi M, Balconi G, et al. Ultrasonography in the diagnosis of soft tissue tumours. Ital J Orthop Traumatol. 1986 Mar. 12(1):109-15. [Medline].\nChiou HJ, Chou YH, Chiu SY, Wang HK, Chen WM, Chen TH, et al. Differentiation of benign and malignant superficial soft-tissue masses using grayscale and color doppler ultrasonography. J Chin Med Assoc. 2009 Jun. 72(6):307-15. [Medline].\nImaeda T, Seki M, Sone Y, et al. Gallium-67 citrate scintigraphy in the pre-operative evaluation of soft tissue tumors of the extremities. Ann Nucl Med. 1991 Nov. 5(4):127-32. [Medline].\nSouthee AE, Kaplan WD, Jochelson MS, et al. Gallium imaging in metastatic and recurrent soft-tissue sarcoma. J Nucl Med. 1992 Sep. 33(9):1594-9. [Medline]. [Full Text].\nTerui S, Terauchi T, Abe H, et al. On clinical usefulness of Tl-201 scintigraphy for the management of malignant soft tissue tumors. Ann Nucl Med. 1994 Feb. 8(1):55-64. [Medline].\nAbe H, Terui S, Terauchi T, et al. Comparison of Tc-99m pertechnetate with Tl-201 and Ga-67 scintigraphy of malignant soft-tissue tumors. Clin Nucl Med. 1997 Jan. 22(1):38-41. [Medline].\nOtsuka N, Fukunaga M, Morita K, et al. Uptake of technetium-99m DTPA in retroperitoneal liposarcoma. Radiat Med. 1990 May-Jun. 8(3):88-91. [Medline].\nOhta H, Shane FI, Endo K, et al. Images of liposarcoma using technetium-99m bleomycin and technetium (V)-99m DMSA. Clin Nucl Med. 1986 Dec. 11(12):842-4. [Medline].\nSakamoto A, Fukutoku Y, Matsumoto Y, Harimaya K, Oda Y, Iwamoto Y. Myxoid liposarcoma with negative features on bone scan and [18F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography. World J Surg Oncol. 2012. 10:214. [Medline].\nLois JF, Fischer HJ, Deutsch LS, et al. Angiography in soft tissue sarcomas. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1984. 7(6):309-16. [Medline].\nUltrasonogram in a 32-year-old woman with a mass above the left popliteal fossa shows a hypoechoic (but solid) mass.\nHepatic angiogram in a 50-year-old man who presented with a 6-month history of a dull ache over the right hypochondrium. The image shows a hypovascular mass that displaces the liver medially. The mass was believed to represent a retroperitoneal liposarcoma; however, at laparotomy, the tumor was discovered to be intrahepatic. The histologic appearance was that of a high-grade liposarcoma infiltrating the diaphragm.\nAli Nawaz Khan, MBBS, FRCS, FRCP, FRCR Consultant Radiologist and Honorary Professor, North Manchester General Hospital Pennine Acute NHS Trust, UK\nAli Nawaz Khan, MBBS, FRCS, FRCP, FRCR is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, British Medical Association, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of the United States, British Society of Interventional Radiology, Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of Radiologists, Royal College of Surgeons of England\nMuthusamy Chandramohan, MBBS, DMRD, FRCR Consultant Radiologist, Bradford Teaching Hospitals, UK\nSumaira Macdonald, MBChB, PhD, FRCP, FRCR, EBIR Chief Medical Officer, Silk Road Medical\nSumaira Macdonald, MBChB, PhD, FRCP, FRCR, EBIR is a member of the following medical societies: British Medical Association, British Society of Interventional Radiology, British Society of Endovascular Therapy, Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, International Society for Vascular Surgery, Royal College of Physicians, Royal College of Radiologists, Scottish Radiological Society, Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland\nFahad Ogla Alkubaidan, MBBS, SSCR Associate Consultant, Musculoskeletal Radiology, Deputy Program Director, Residency Training Program, King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC), Saudi Arabia\nSpecialty Editor Board\nBernard D Coombs, MB, ChB, PhD Consulting Staff, Department of Specialist Rehabilitation Services, Hutt Valley District Health Board, New Zealand\nMurali Sundaram, MBBS, FRCR, FACR Professor of Radiology and Consulting Staff, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU\nMurali Sundaram, MBBS, FRCR, FACR is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Radiology, American Medical Association, American Roentgen Ray Society, Association of University Radiologists, International Skeletal Society, Radiological Society of North America, Society of Skeletal Radiology\nFelix S Chew, MD, MBA, MEd Professor, Department of Radiology, Vice Chairman for Academic Innovation, Section Head of Musculoskeletal Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine\nFelix S Chew, MD, MBA, MEd is a member of the following medical societies: American Roentgen Ray Society, Association of University Radiologists, Radiological Society of North America\nGiuseppe Guglielmi, MD Associate Professor of Radiology, Department of Radiology, Scientific Institute Hospital\nPrint this section\nPrint the entire contents of\nPrint the entire contents of article\nencoded search term (Liposarcoma Imaging) and Liposarcoma Imaging\nRelated Conditions and Diseases\nKaposi Sarcoma Staging\nPathology - Sarcomas of the Head and Neck\nOsteogenic Sarcoma Staging\nSoft Tissue Sarcoma Staging\nSoft Tissue Sarcoma Guidelines\nCardiac Sarcoma\nSynovial Sarcoma Imaging\nMedscape Rare Diseases\nFDA Finalizes Guidance for Power Morcellators in Gynecologic Surgery\nAntiretroviral Treatment Outcomes Among Late HIV Presenters Initiating Treatment With Integrase Inhibitors or Protease Inhibitors\nCutaneous and Mucosal Manifestations of Viral Diseases\nAccording to Oncologist/Hematologists\nPatients Can Read Your Clinical Notes Starting Nov 2\nMore Evidence for Lower Risk With Certain Blood Groups\nPandemic Epiphany: Medicine Isn't Worth It\nA Seismic Shift -- and a Grand 'Experiment' -- in Colorectal Cancer Screening\nDid the Wise Men Notice the Babinski Sign in the Christ Child?\n2002 871284-overview Procedures\nProcedures Pathology - Sarcomas of the Head and Neck\n2003 /viewarticle/925110 Clinical Case\nPerspectives on the Diagnosis and Management of Epithelioid Sarcoma 0.75 CME / ABIM MOC Credits Clinical Case\nYou are being redirected to Medscape Education\nYes, take me there\n0.75 CME / ABIM MOC\nPerspectives on the Diagnosis and Management of Epithelioid Sarcoma\n2002 2007127-overview Diseases & Conditions\nDiseases & Conditions Kaposi Sarcoma Staging\nDiseases & Conditions Osteogenic Sarcoma Staging"