Table 1 Radiological properties of the presented case compared to five considered differential diagnosesa
Demarcation | Sclerotic rim | T1W | T2W | T2WFS | Calcification | Postcontrast | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Our patient case | Well defined | No | Isointense to slightly hyperintense signal | Hyperintense | Hyperintense | No | Homogenous; Prominently enhanced |
Fibrous dysplasia | Well demarcated | Yes | Hypointense to isointense | Hyperintense | intermediate to high | Yes | Variable contrast enhancement (from mild to marked in degree) |
Enchondroma | Well defined | No | Hypointense | Hyperintense | Predominantly high signal | Yes | “Rim and arc” pattern |
Ewing sarcoma | Poorly defined | No | Hypointense to isointense | Variable signal intensities | Variable signal intensities | No | Heterogeneous; Prominently enhanced |
Langerhans cell histiocytosis | Well defined | No | Hypointense to isointense | Hyperintense | Hyperintense | No | Diffusely enhanced |
Intraosseous hemangioma | Well defined | No | Low to intermediate signal intensity (with regions of high signal) | Hyperintense | Hyperintense (with regions of low signal) | No | Heterogeneous Increased enhanced |
Angioleiomyoma | Well defined | No | Isointense to slightly hyperintense signal | Hyperintense | Hyperintense | No | Homogenous; Prominently enhanced |